The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1899-12-06

market of any particular kind Of mer-
chandise or commodity necessary to the
general community by suppressing
natural and ordinary competition.
whereby prices are unduly enhanced to
the general consumer. are obnoxious
not only to the common law, but also to
the public welfare. There must be a
remedy for the evils involved in such
organizations. If the present law can
be extended more certainly to control
or check these monopolies or trusts, it
should be done without delay What
ever power congress possesses over this
important subject should be promptly
ascertained and asserted.
Harrison's Message
President Harrison, in his annual
message of December 5, 1889, says:
Earnest attention should be given
by congress to a considera ton Of the
question how far the restraint of those
combinations of capital commonly call
ed trusts is matter of federal juris-
diction. When organized, as they often
are, to crush out all healthy competi-
ton and to mpnopOize the production
or sale of an article of commerce and
general necessity, they are dangerous
conspiracies against the public good:
they should be made the subject of
prohibitory and even penal legislation
An act to protect trade and COM
merce against unlawful restraints and
monopolies was passed by congress on
July .. 1890 The provisions of this
statute are comprehensive and string
ent. 1t declares every contract or
combination in the form of a trust CT
otherwise 4 conspiracy in the restraint
of trade or commerce between the sew
erral states or foreign nations to be
unlawful. 1t denominates as criminal
every person who makes any such con-
tract or engages in any such combina-
ton or conspiracy and provides pun
iShlnent by fine or Imprisonment. 1t
invests the several circuit courts of
the United States with jurisdiction to
prevent and restrain viola tions of the
act. and makes it the duty of the sew
eral United States district attorneys
under the direction of the attorney gen
eral to institute proceedings in equity
to prevent and restrain such Violate
Ii further confers upon any person or
corporation, by reason of anything for
hidden or declared unlawful by the act,
the power to sue therefor in any Cir
cult court in the United States without
respect to the amount in controversy,
and to recover three-fold the damages
by him sustained and the costs of the
suit including reas onable attorneys
fees. 1t will be perceived that the act
is aimed at every kind Of combination
in the nature Of a trust, or monopoly
in restraint Of Interstate or internation-
al commerce. 81
CIevcland's Words.
President Cleveland, in his annual
message of Dec. I, 1896, more than six
years subsequent to the enactment of
this law-after stating the evils of
these trust combinations, says:
Though congress has attempted to
deal with this matter by legislation, the
laws passed for that purpose thus far
| have proved ineffective, not because of
| any lack of disposition CT attempt to
enforce them. but simply because the
| laws themselves as interpreted by the
| courts do not reach the difficulty. If the
| insuffciencieS of the existing laws can
| be remeded by further legislation it
should be done. The fact must be rec
| ognized, however, that all federal leg
! islation on this subject may fall short
of its purpose because of inherent OBJ
! stacles and also because Of the complex
| character of our governmental system
which, while making the federal auth
! GRITTY supreme within it's sphere. has
| carefully limited that sphere by metes
/ and bounds which cannot be trans
crossed. The decision of our higest
court on this precise question renders
| it quite doubtful whether the evils OF
trusts and monopolies can be adequate
! ly treated through federal action, UNI
|
to include in their objects the transpor-
| tation and intercourse between states
or between the United States and for
| eign countries.
ut does not follow, however that
this is the limit of the remedy thai
may be supplied. Even though it may
be found that federal authority is nc
broad enough to fully reach the case
there can be no doubt of the power o.
the several state to act effectively ii
the premises and there should be nv
reason to doubt their willingness tt
judiciously exercise such power
The great diversity of treatment II
| different states arising from this cast
and the intimate relations of all part!
Of the country to each other without re
garding state lines in the conduct o
business, have made the enforcement
of state laws difficult. 1t is apparen
that uniformity of legislation upon thi
subject in the several states is much t.
be desired. 1t is to be hoped that sucl
uniformity founded in a wise and jus
discrimination between what is injur
ious and what is useful and necessar.
in business operations may be obtain
ed and that means may be found for tn
congress, within the limitations of it
constitutional power. to so supplement
an effective code of state legislation a
to make a complete system of Law
throughout tlse United States, to compe
again observance of the Salutary rule
to which l have referred.
The whole question is so importan
and far reaching that l am sure no par
of it will be lightly considered, bu
every phase of it will have the studie'
| deliberation of the congress, resulting
In wise and judicious action.
| FOREIGN AFFAIRS.