The Savannah morning news., 1902-10-15
KNOX ON The TRUSTS
ATTORNEY GENERAL ADDRESSES
FITTSBURG AUDIENCE.
ON THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
HE MAKES his ARGUMENT OF CON
TROL OF Trusts

He believes That Experience Has
Taught is That the Least Interior
ence Consistent with Preservation
of Essential Rights should Exist.
Congress, He Says, Can, IL IL sees
Fit. Make the Necessary Law.
Pttsburg, Pa. oct. 14-Attorney
General Knox addressed the members
of the Chamber of Commerce at the
Hotel Schenley here tonight. There
were zoo guests present. The subject
of his address was The Commerce
Clause of the Constitution and the
Trusts"
In the course of his speech Mr. Knox
showed what the government had done
in the direction of suppressing trusts,
and what he thought could be done to
give the government control of trusts.
Among other things, speaking on the
question as to whether Congress has
the power to take the supervision of
trusts which do an interstate business,
he said:
The extent to which legislative con-
troll over commercial activities should
be exercised is of course. a question
for legislative wisdom. We have the
experience Of the other nations to guide
us in determining how far the delicate
and mysterious rules of trade can be
interfered with by positive statutes
without injury. That experience
teaches us that the least interference
consistent with the preservation Of es-
sential rights should exist. Arbitrary
regulations that restrain free inter-
course are usually found to be unwise.
Primarily it is for the Congress to
decide whether it has the power and
whether and to what extent it will ex-
ecute lt-what character of restraints,
whether all or those only which are
unreasonable and injurious shall fall
under the ban. whether legislation in
the first instance should extend to all
commerce or only to commerce in arti-
cles of vital Importance to the people
The time never was when the English
speaking people permitted the articles
necessary for their existence to be mo-
nopolized or controlled, and all devices
TO that end found condemnation In the
body of their laws. The great Eng
lsh Judges pronounced that such man
ifestations of human aVarice required
| no statute to declare their unlawful
ness, that they were crimes against
common law-that is. against common
| right.
1t is difficult to improve upon the
great unwritten code known as the
common law Under its salutary guar
antics and restraints the English
speaking people have attained their
wealth and power 1t condemns mo-
nopoly, and contracts in restraint of
trade as well. The distinction howev-
er, between restraints that are reason
able in view of all the circumstances
and those which are unreasonable, is
recognized and has been followed in
this country by the courts.
This distinction makes a rule that
may be practically applied and pre-
serves the rational mean between I'M
strained commerce and the absolute
freedom of contract.
A law regulating interstate commerce
for its protection against restraint. so
broad as to cover all persons whose
business is conducted under agree
ments which are in any way or to any
extent In restraint of trade might ex-
clude thousands Of small concerns con-
Quoting Industries In one state from
marketing their products in others:
but law which only covers contracts
and combinations in restraint of trade
as defined by common law would ex-
clude all hurtful combinations and con-
splracies. Congress can, If it sees fit,
adopt the scheme of that law In the
enforcement of such law each case as
IT arose would be considered upon it's
own facts, and the rule of guidance
would be as laid down by the Supreme
Court of the United States; that is,
public welfare is first considered, and
If 1t be not involved and the restraint
upon one party is not greater than pro-
lection to the other party requires, the
contract may be sustained. The ques-
ton Is whether, under the particular
circumstances of the case and the ma
ture OF the particular contract in
volved in 1t, the contract is or is not
reasonable"