The evening times., 1899-12-05

tant subject should be promptly ascertain
ed and asserted.
President Harrison in his annual mes
sage OF December 3. 1889. says:
Earnest attention should be given by Congress
to consideration OF the question how far the re-
straint of those combinations Of capital commonly
called trusts is matter Of Federal jurisdiction.
When organized, they often are, TO crush out
all healthy competition and to monopolize the
production sale Of IN article of commerce and
general necessity they are dangerous consplracies
against the pubic good, and should be made the
subject of prohibitory and even penal legislation.
The Law In the Case.
An act to protect trade and commerce
against unlawful restraints and monopolies
was passed by Congress on the I'd of July,
1880. The provisions CT this statute are
comprehensive and stringent. 1t declares
every contract or combination. in the form
Of trust or otherwise. or conspiracy In
the restraint of trade or commerce among
the several States or with foreign nations.
to be unlawful. 1t deno.ninates as a
criminal every person who makes any such
contract or engages in any such combina-
tion or conspiracy, and provides q pun
ishment by fine or Imprisonment. 1t in
vests the several circuit courts OF the
United States with jurisdiction to prevent
and restrain violations CT the act, and
makes 1t the duty of the several United
States district attorneys, under the direc-
tion OF the Attorney General. to institute
proceedings in equity to prevent and re-
strain such violations. 1t further confers
upon any person who shall be injured In
his business or property by any other
person or corporation by reason OF any
thing forbidden or declared to be unlaw-
full by the act the power to sue therefor
49, fhn mi
without respect to the amount In contro-
yersy, ard to recover three-fold the dam
ages by him sustained and the costs of
the suit. including reasonable attorney fees.
1t will be perceived that the act Is aimed
at every kind of combination in the ma
Jure of q trust or monopoly In restraint
OF interstate of international commerce.
The prosecution by the United States OF
offences under the act of 1890 has been
frequently reserted to in the Federal
courts and notable efforts in the restraint
of interstate commerce. such as the Trans
Missouri Freight Association and the Joint
Traffic Association, have been successfully
opposed and suppressed.
President Cleveland in his annual mes
sage of December a.. 1S96-mOre tnan six
years subsequent to the enactment OF this
law-after stating the evils OF these trust
combinations, says:
Though CCngTeS= has attempted 10 dtii VIII ehho
matter by legislation, the laws passed Tor tnat
purpose thus far have proved ineffective, not be-
cause of any lack OF disposition or attempt 10
enforce them. but simply because the laws tien,-
selye, as interpreted by the courts do not reach
the difficulty II the insuffciencies OF existing
laws can be remedied by further legislation, it
should be done. The fact must be reeognizea'
however that all Federal Legislation on this sub
icet may fall short Of its purpose because OF m
herent Obstacles, and also because of the complex
character of governmental system, WINCH
E. IL
in its sphere. has carefully limited that sphere
by mcies and bounds which cannot be transgres-
ed. The decision of our highest court on this
precise question renders it quite doubtful whether
Iie evils of trusts and monopolies can be ade-
,iiately treated through Federal action, unless
they seek directly and purposely. to include IN
giier objects transportation intercourse be
States or between the United States and
foreign courTiCs-
1t does not follow. however. that this is the
limit of the remedy that may be applied Even
though it may he found that Federal authority Ia
not broad enough fully reach the case there
caa be no doubt Of the power of the several
States act effectively in the premises, and there
should be reason TO doubt their willingness 10
jIdiciCusly exercise such power.
Legislative Failures. 4
The State legislation TO which President
Cleveland looked for relief from the evils
of trusts has failed TO accomplish fully
that object. This is probably due TO a
great extent to the fact that different
States take different views as to the proper
way TO discriminate between evil and in
furious combinations and those associa-
tions which are beneficial and necessary
10 the business prosperity of the country.
The great diversity of treatment in differ
ent States arising from this cause and the
intimate relations of all parts of the coun-
try 10 each other without regarding State
lines in the conduct Of business have made
the enforcement of State laws difficult.
1t is apparent that uniformity of legis- |
lation upon this subject in the several |
States is much 10 be desired. Ii is to be |
hoped that such uniformity founded in |
wise and just discrimination between what |
is injurious and what is useful and nee
essary in business operations may be OBJ |
tained and that means may be found for |
the Congress within the limitations of its |
constitutional power SO to supplement an /,
effective code OF State legislation as to |
make complete system OF laws through |
out the United States adequate to compel |
n general observance Of the salutary rules |
to which l have referred.
The whole question is so important and |
far-reachng that l am sure no part of il |
will be lightly considered, but every phase |
of it will have the studied deliberation OF |
the Congress, resulting in wise and judi |
cious action.