The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-03-22
A MIDDLE IN TEXAS.

Tho recent decision of the United
States Court in the antitrust case from
Illinois, in which the antitrust statute
of that State was declared to be uncon-
stitutional, because it contained pro-
vision exemptins live stock and agricul-
tural productions from the operation OF
the law, is causing a great deal OF specu-
lation in Texas. A correspondent writ
ing from Austin, says that it is the opin-
ion of those who are we'll up in the law
that this decision nullifics the antitrust
acts of Texas. The Galveston News says
that the general understanding is that
in the Texas act exemption has been
made in favor OF labor organization, and
that formerly both farmers and stock
articles together, the News thinks that
it is possible at least that the whole line
exempting them is still in force and ef-
feet. There are several of these anti
trust acts, and the News says they are
cumulative and must be taken and con-
strued together. 1t believes that there
are exemptions under the Texas statute
and that, therefore, all these statutes are,
according to the decision of the court,
unconstitutional.
But our contemporary raises another
interesting objection. Suppose, it asks
there are no exemptions. does anybody
believe that the farmers, stockmen, truck
shippers, fruit-raisers and labor unions
all close combinations and cooperative
concern, designed especially and openly
to accomplish objects which are declared
felonious by this law. are going to have
their organization broken UP and their
right to secure cooperation taken away?
But, on the other hand, if none Of these
is exempted. why have not these organi-
cations been prohibited under the Texas
law?
And it concludes:
Thus the dilemma develops, to fright
the souls of Texas politicians who have
been lodging and performing some foxy
work at this point. If nobody is exempt
then who will dare attempt to apply this
rigorous law? II farmers, stockmen or
trades unionists are exempt, then the law
Is unconstitutional The best that one
can say for the statutes referred to is
mess of soft politics. beginning, even in
State overwhelmingly Democratic, with
exemptions of more than four-1ifths of
the voters. and declaring citizens stand
ing with the minority fclons for doing
the very things which the voting ma
iority were left free to 60 at will.
We have seen no better illustration of
this than the absurdity OF such laws. The
Times has been contending for years that,
unless we prohibit corporations altogether,
1t IS impracticable to enforce antitrust
laws. All such laws, wherever they
have been tried. have proven to be dead
failures, because they are contradictory
because they are class laws, and unde:
our Constitution class legislation cannot
exist. II farmers or stock-raisers OF
working men may organize for their own
protection and for the advancement CT
their own interests, manufacturers and
merchants cannot he prohibited from or
ganizins on the same score and for the
same purpose. Yet many newspapers
throughout the South. which never loose
the opportunity to dcnounce trusts, have
time and again urged the cotton planters
: OF the South to form trust, with the
object in view of limiting the production
OF raw cotton and controlling the price.