The Independent. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1895-1905, 1900-06-14
The Anti Trust Amendment /.

as early in June as possible and that
in order to avoid delay no legislation
than the passage OF appropriation
bills will be considered except he
antitrust measures, which are re-.
eerded 10 the house as matters OF
urgency. There are two of these
measures, one bill in charge OF Rs
preventative Overstreet amending
the Sherman law and the other
resolution OF the Judiciary Com.
mittee proposing an amendment to
the constitution comforting upon
Congress power to deal with trusts
and to pass laws for their regulation.
The constitutional amendment is
so much the more important of the
two measures that it completely
overshaiows the other aud occupies
almost all the attention given TO he
subject. As reported the proposed
amendment declares:
Section /. All powers conferred
by this article shall extend to the
several States aud Territories, the
District OF Columbia and all terri
| tory under the sovereignty and sub
ject to the jurisdiction Of the United
States.
Section 2. Congress shall have
power to define, regulate, control,
prohibit or dissolve trusts, mono
poles or combinations, whether ex
listing in the form OF corporation
or otherwise. The several States
may continue to exercise such power
in any manner not in conflict with
the laws Of the United States.
Section 3. Congress shall have
power to enforce the provisions Of
this article by appropriate legisla-
ton.
1t will bs noted that the first Sec
tion authorizes Congress to define,
regulate and control trusts not only
in the States, Territories and the
District OF Columbia, but "in all
territory urdsr the sovereignty and
subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States"
The phrase is clearly intended to
include such colonial possessions as
the country has acquired or may
hereafter acquire and to put an end
to any controversy concerning the
right OF Congress- to legislate under
the proposed amendment for such
possessions. This is therefore some.
thing new in the language Of the
constitution if not in law and will
doubtless be one OF the most gener-
ally discussed features OF the reso-
luton.
The argumen for the amendment
is that experience, has proven that a
proper regulation of trusts cannot
be effected by separate State action,
The evil is nationa! and the remedy
must be national. 1t is claimed by
members of the Judiciary Commit
tee that the eecond section, which
contains tho essential part OF the
amendment, does not introduce any
nav principle OF government, but ia
only a new application and an am
plification of the principle involved
in the interstate commerce law aud
that thereto re- the amendment is not
to be regarded as in any way radi-
cal departure from the recognized
scope Of Congressional action.
The attitude OF the Democrats to.
ward the resolution is curious. The
leaders of that party have for years
past declared that trusts should be
regulated by Congress and Bryan
has been loud in promising the PEG,
pie what he would do il elected
President and given authority to
deal with trusts. Now, however
there is confusion in the camp. Since
the Republicans have shown a viii.
lingness and an ability to grapple
with the trust problem the Demo.
Gratis have suddenly discovered that
the thing is dangerous. Some oil
them assert the resolution is trick
devised to rob Bryan OF his cam,