The evening times., 1900-02-24

of that power which gave it being, and
upon its first attempt to abuse the priyl-
leges with which il has been endowed
should be brought to book.
The Supreme Court has decided IN the
Addyston Pine and Steel Company ana
the T. c. Knight Company cases that 'he
| Government has the power TO act When-
ever Interstate or foreign commerce 10
involved. and both are involved in the
sugar. paper. oil, and steel trades Ihe
Government by permitting the transporta-
tion of these wares aids and abets the
monopoly"
Mr. Richardson Indicated that it 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 ip The Addyston and knight cases,
and he was convinced that the Interstate
/ Commerce Commission has the authority
to refuse interstate transportation 10
manufactured articles which produce
/ enormous profits by means of monopoly
/ and until the profits shall have been
4 brought 70 point within reasonable I'm
| its.
Mr. Richardson said that to make IL
mandatory upon the Interstate Commerce
/ I
which the law invested il he had offered
/ 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 Deuio-
cratic minority in the House would ngn'
/ a good battle for the adoption OF the anu
/ trust resolutions.
/ When l drafted. the resolution aimed
casd
ardsop. Il had in mind the language oil
! chief Justice Fuller who delivered the
opinion Of the court in the case OF the
I United States against the E. c. knlght
Companv. Although in that opinion II
| was held that the company by means oi
combination had obtained a practical mo
nopoly of the business OF manufacturing
! sugar. yet the act CT Congress did no'
! touch the case because the combination
/ only related to manufacture ana not u
! commerce among the States or with ior
eign nations. the language OF the Ohie'
Justice was most significant
The Logic of the Case.
Il believe in the logic of the argumen
that the power to control the manufacture
of refined sugar paper. oil. steel. ruooer
| and other like things is monopoly over
1 the necessities of life. to the enJoyiheh
of which by large part of the popuiauo'
of The United States interstate commerce
is Indispensable. and that therefore th'
/ General Government, in the exercise
the power TO regulate commerce, may re
nrass such monopoly directly and set asid
the instruments which have created IL
The proceedings in the Addyston Pap
and Steel Company was commenced IN De
half of the United States under the so
called Antitrust act of Congress passe'
I,Iy . 1899. 1t was undertaken that
perpetual injunction might be optalhe
against the six corporations that "ef
made defendants. from further actlnt
under or carrying on combination enter
ed into between them. because 1t was
restraint of trade and commerce amont
the States. ,;.to,,
II coutend that the same condition
, o1;- in other trusts as in that IN po IL
In The. ADHESION case the defendants en-
. tered into a combination ana 'ohSpi'aS
( ,-,r,s themselves hv which il was agree
trat there should be no competition Ne
tween them in any OF the States or leril
, - mentioned in this agreement abou
rbirty-slx in all. in regard 10 the manu-
facrrrre and sale Of cast iron pipe. q
whole agreement was entered into !
order 10 embrace the price for the iro
pine dealt in by the defndants. 4 can st
a strong analogy between the agfeenlel
' binding these several companies toSethe
ard the agreements under when near
: every other trust is operated. As the Id
has heen applied to the Addyston compf
- nv il NAV also be applied to concerns OF
- similar nature. ] am willing to deVo
T. my energies TO bringing this about
'- Mas cCntended by the defendents in IN!
famous case. that by the true construcJlo
II of the Constitution the powers OF tunsTe'
=. 10 regulate Interstate commerce Is llmitt
. 10 its protection from acts OF inJerIereh'
hy State legislation or by means OF reg
larions made under the authority OF III
State by some political subdivision ther'
Of including also Congressional poN
n over common carriers, elevators. gas. al
e water companies. for reasons stated to
i. peculiar to such carriers and companle
e hut that il does not include the gener
u mower 10 interfere with or prohibit priva
, contracts between citizens. even thout
eurb contracts have interstate CONNER
fer their object and result in direct al
h substantial obstruction to regulation
l. ,bar couuerce Now this Is the arg
n mont set forth in the defence OF near
. every great trust, and il is an argunel
? ] which has been held by the court OF la
resort to be untenable.
p Il expect a greae deal of antitrust ag
" tation from this time on. When the res
lutious which | have offered shall ha'
~ been reported back from the commit
- TO which they were referred, there wI
= he a discussion of them of course, but
Is look for little or nc opposition.