The evening times., 1900-07-14
POWER OVER THE TRUSTS.
Congress and the Sfafes Have Au-
thOrity to Regulate Commerce.


appearing in the Congressional Record
OF July g. a portion Of which was actually
delivered upon the foor Of the Mouse on
Saturday. June 2. when there. was under
consideration the antitrust amendment to
the Constitution. This speech partakes
more strongly Of the nature OF a brief. the
intent Of which is TO prove thar there al
ready abides in the several States and in
Congress sufficient power 70 protect the
people against the extortions of trusts
1t is set forth that under existing Fed
eral and State laws the State has the pow
er 10 create, empower. regulate control
and dissolve domestic corporations. and
may exclude foreign corporations entirely
when engaged in internal. local or State
commerce. even though as in the Texas
case the foreign corporation was incorpo-
rated TO do business in Missouri and other
States by buying and selling naval stores,
oils. etc.
In this case this oil company violated the
antitrust laws of Texas. and under that
statute its charter was forfeited. and II
WAS excluded from doing any local inter
nal. or State trade within the State OF
Texas The judgment entered by the trial
court was affirmed by the court Of civil ap-
peals OF the State Of Texas. which iudg-
ment was reafhrmed by the Supreme Court
OF the United States March lg 1900. and
reads as follows:
1t is therefore ordered. adjudged and
decreed by the court that the defendant.
the Waters Pierce oil Company. be. and
Is hereby denied the right and prohibited
from doing any business within this State,
hat he ~ 4. V,.eF Kf-sf1 -
this State heretofore issued July 8, 1889.
by the Secretary Of State Of this State be,
and the same is hereby. cancelled and held
for naught. and that said defendant the
Waters-Pierce Oil Company. its managers.
superintendents. agents servants and at
torneys be. and are hereby. perpetuaIly
enioined and restrained from doing busi-
ness within this State. Nothing herein
shall be cOstrued TO In any way affect or
apply 10 or prohibit said defendants right
10 engage in Interstate commerce within
this State"
The defendant was forced to trial for its
Illegal acts o: commerce in restraining the
internal local or State trade done by II
within the State OF Texas. The trial court
expressly excluded from the consideration
OF the jury the defendants legal or iie-
gal acts in restraint Of Interstate trade.
10 which action the defendant excepted.
on trial for its Illegal acts done within the
State because it was engaged also 10 IN
ter-State commerce But the Texas court
overruled this objection, and this ruling
was expressly affirmed by the Supreme
Court Of the United States holding tha, the
courts OF Texas had the right 10 cOnstrue
State statute. and tha; its action did not
abridge any Of the constitutional rights OF
the defendant citing many authorities.
Justice McKeuna said
The transactions OF InteT-S State COM
merce were Withdrawn from the cOnsidera-
tion Of the jury and were also excepted
from the judgment The statutes must be
considered in reference TO tf-ese contracts
that is, contracts pertaining 10 local com
merce. In any other aspect they are not
subject 10 our review on this record. eX-
cept the power Of the State 10 restrict their
regulation to local commerce. upon which
a contention is raised. Ii Is based on the
following provision: "
" Every foreign corporation violating
any OF the provisions OF this act is hereby
denied the right and prohibited from doing
any business within this State, and il shall
be the duty OF the Attorney General 10 en-
proceedings IN the District Court Of Ira
Wis
The claim Is II We understand Il. that
the statute prohibits all business OF for
eign corporations. and hence IS unconsti-
tutional as including interstate business
and cannot be limited by judicial construc-
tion 10 local business and the unconsyitu-
tional taint thereby removed
Having stated that the Federal courts
have the right 70 interpret Federal stat
utes. Justice McKerna said:
The courts Of Texas have like power
OF Interpretation OF the statutes OF Texas
What they say the statutes Of tha; Stale
-
whether j; is declared b. limiting the oh
iects OF their general language or by sep
Grating their provisions into valid and il
velid parts
AS to foreign corporutions. the co;rt
said:
Having no absolute right OF gecogniu
in other States and depending for u
recognition and enforcement Of its cor
tracts upon their assent. IL follows. as
matter of course. that such assent may he
granted upon such terms and conditions a
those States may think proper 10 impose.
The antitrust act of 1890 undertook 10
prohibit foreign and Interstate trust
combines. and the court so held il De-
cember. 1899
In the Pipe case the court held:
Congress may prohibit the performance
of any contract between indiyd 10 d
recly regulate 10 any substantial extent
Interstate OF foreign commerce. The DOW
er Of Congress to regulate Interstate COM
merce comprises the right 10 enact a 'aw
prohibiting the citizen from entering into
these private contracts which directly eg-
ulate 10 a greater or less degree among
the States"
Under this ruling it is within the power
of Congress to prohibit inter-Sta trust
trade altogether.
The Supreme Court of the United States
has said. Congress has the power, the
prerOgative. and il is its duty to prov de
for the security Of the people OF the In tel
States in relation to foreign corporate bod
les or foreign individuals with whom they
may have relations OF foreign OF in.er-
State commerce. This the court held vas
the law in CruJcher VS. Kentucky cit *
many cases 1t has been rafirmed
The opinion in the CrutcheT case no Dis
that Congress would undoubtedly have TIE
right to exact from associations Of that
kind (fOreign OF Interstate commerceJ ny
guarantees it might deem neoes e~y for
the public security for the faithful trans
action OF business; and. es il is within
the province of Congress. IL is 10 be PIE
sumed that Congress has done. or viii do.
all that is necessary and proper in that re-
gard. II has frequently been laid GoSn BY
this court that the power of Congress over
interstate commerce Is as eb oIute as il
is over foreign commerce. The pre- ogat've
the responsibility. and the dirty of prOyid-
ing for the security OF citizens ard tee
people OF the United States in re alton 10
foreign corporate bodies or foreign irdi-
viduals with whom they may have TT la
tions of foreign commerce. belong TO The
Government of the United State. and rot
TO the Governments of the several Stl-es:
and confidence in that regard may be e.
cd in h.a No % LAT Nth