The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1900-02-24

of that power which gave Il being. and
upon its first attempt to abuse the privi-
leges with which IL has been endowed,
should be brought to book.
The Supreme Court has decided in the
Addyston Pipe and Steel Company and
the Z. G. Knight Company cases that the
Government has the power to act when
ever inter-st9'e or foreign commerce is
involved. and both are involved in the
sugar. paper. oil. and steel trades The
Government by permitting the transporta-
ton of these wares aids and abets the
monopoly
Mr. Richardson indicated that IL is his
intention to attack every combination OF
men controlling the necessities of life. as
he has attacked the sugar. paper. and
steel trusts He said that he had care
fully studied the decisions Of the Supreme
Court 10 he Addyst0n and Knight cases,
and be was convinced that the Interstate
Commerce Commission has the authority
to refuse Interstate transportation TO
manufactured articles which produce
enormous profits by means Of monopoly.
and untH the profits shall have been
brought 70 a point within reasonable linn
its.
Mr. Richardson said that to make il
mandatory upon the Inter State Commerce
Commission to exercise the authority with
which the law invested II ne Hdu OutItu
these resolutions and would offer others
which he believed would receive the sup
port OF the Representatives OF all political
parties in Congress and which would there
fore be adopted He knew that the Demo
cratic minority in the House would fight
good battle for the adoption Of the anti
truss resolutions.
when l drafted. the resolution aimed
against the Sugar Trust" said Mr.. Rich
, o-fFc bad in nd he
Chief Justice Fuller who delivered the
opinion Of the court in the case OF the
United states against the E c. knight
Company. Although in that opinion 1t
was held that the company by means OF
combination had obtained a practical mo
nOpO!y OF the business OF manufacturing
sugar. yet the act or Congress did not
touch the case because the combination
only related to manufacture and not to
commerce among the States or with for
eign nations the language or the Cher
Justice was most significant
The Logic of the Case
II believe in the logic Of the argument
/ that the power to control the manufacture
Of refined sugar. paper. oil. steel. rubber,
| and other like things is a monopoly over
! the necessities Of life, to the enjoyment
/ Of which by a large part OF the population
of the United States Interstate commerce
I is Indispensable. and that therefore the
/ General Government, i'm the exercise OF
the power to regulate commerce. may re-
I press such monopoly directly and set esd
4 the instruments which have created il.
The proceedings in the Addyston Pipe
and Steel Company was commenced in be-
half Of the United States under the so
of
. JuIv p 1890 II was undertaken that a
perpetual injunction might be obtained
against the six corporations that were
made defendants. from further acting
under or carrying on a combination enter
ed into between them. because IL was in
( restraint Of trade and commerce among
I the States.
IL contend that the same conditions
exist I'm other trusts as i'm that IN 20 nj
In the. ADHESION case the defendants en-
tered into "a combination aud conspiracy
among themselves bv which it was agreed
. t;rat there should be no competition he
/ tween them in any Of the states or Terri
tories mentioned In this agreement, abou
/ thirty-sIx in an. ia regard TO the manu-
factusv and sale Of cast iron pipe IN,
whole agreement was entered into II
order TO embrace the price for the iroI
strong analCzy between the agreemeu
. binding these several companies together
. ard the agreements under which uearl,
. every other trust is operated. As the Law
has been applied TO the Addystou compa
. nv IL may also be applied 20 concerns Of
similar nature. ] am willing &C devCu
my energies 10 bringing his about i
was cCntended by the defendeuts In tina
7 famous case. that by the true construction
Of the Constitution the powers OF Congress
to regulate Interstate commerce is Unite
to its protection from acts of interference
hy State legislation or By means OF regu
IariOus made under the authority OF tn
State by some political subdivision there
OF. including also Congressional -pONe
over common carriers. elevators. gas. an
[ water companies. for reasons stated To D.
peculiar to such carriers and companies
but that il does not include the genera
power TO interfere with or prohibit privat
I contracts between citizens. even thOuE
J such contracts have Interstate COmmeTc
for their object and result i'm a direct an
substantial obstruction to a regulation O
/ that cOmmerce Now this rs the argu
ment set forth in the defence Of nearl
every great trust and it is an argumen
which has been held by the court Of las
resort to be Untenable.
4 expect a greaS deal of antitrust agi
tation from this time on. When the Te=O
/ buttons which ! have offered shall hav
been reported back from the commit
to which they were referred, there wil
be a discussion Of them of course, but
look for little or nc opposition