Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1902-12-18

!, n.
SHERMAN ANTI TRUST Law.
commissioner f>narp'- Opinion us TO
1Srn, IL Ra> Failed as II Rcmedia1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT KNOWS
p5tt>aarg speech Highly Com
,rcndcd.
wASl3lNGToN, December i7.-(spccialD
T4e 60Ho.tauee nov aCtacnE.g % ;nc
the Constitution which in Gnu
ane the powers OF Congress reads.
Heas8ate commerce with foreign ma
and sa,aan& the several Safes. and
IRE Ina3an tribes" is IN singular
with It's relative unimpOgtaace
TIC carife Wears of cur history
a nofe th1n thirty years before
So case ia.a0ivinE The right Of Con-
regulate interstate commerce. lln-
cause. came bt fore the Sup, me
~ tac ,>!iCd States In view OF
ubtV OF Eases now nefnrc the
depending uuon this gram OF
4arllv. rs insertion in the ConSti-
u.list be regarded as either
Extraordinary piece Of fort1sity. or
rKable example OF provision. Ia
stt commerce. as We know il. had
Mo iaal existence. Fo" The makers
Constitution TO assign power over
commerce 10 Congress. when
tiafity OF that body was so sharp
saltaG 81 Other particulars, is most
ately len to Marshall to give
great Interpretation of this
ad he with READ provision inter
ii with great liherality The TWO
aaegs OF recent years. about which
st question has focused have
tle Frans- Missouri and that of the
lg #Ic Association. In the former.
glEfne Court decided that he Sner-
lf-trlst law applied 10 ralircacs,
f6aGi no mention had been made
iateot il the original law. 1t
asI,cus to-day that the Shclnan
10 railroads and practically
~ else 80 the next great case.
III lau was whether the Joint Traffic
o1 came within the neanins OF
--cIfist layv respecting combinations
s.t rgt II trade. or, more accurately,
l staa inn OF competition. Each case
led by vote OF FIVE 10 four,
-ls rllc personnel Of the court mad
ii s6Tnlw Whit between the two. SC
III r. Than iF-c men are responsible
decisions which have Assigned
.- status to-day Of the railroads in
I'd antitrust legislation. Mir. Mar
knapp. chairman of the Interstate
zee Commission. looks upon the
n antitrust lax as mos untor-
r.ta 5eparture from the legal rrinyipic
had several hundred years beer
aE as 20 the distinction i.etwce1s
ubie" and unreasonable" re
rts on .rade Acknowledgement
Eras. ii VIII be recalled. emphasizes il
bjs PittrbuER speech the necessity Of get
Eng back to The common law doctrine
l- hs spact Mr.. Knapp believes tnat
aeets of the Sherman antitrust law.
IL ignor5 this common law prln-
e have been wholly unfortunate.
dR- X lAPP'S VIEWS.
Er discussing tie subject with your cor
rs7r8en. to-day Mr.. Knapp said: Tho
9us proposals 80 amend the eXtstfnf
at-tTust law. and the considerable L
- ears defuite demand for such legis-
ta- indicate that the. enactment OF
had moi effected the check upon COM
motions which was designed and expect
E--sEns vino advocated strengthen
Inc mis- law as they term it. apparently
Fl9. asrc more than to enlarge its
a. emphasize its prohibitions. and
provide sevara penalties for its violation
SD Tar as am aware. there Is no proposal
modify in any degree the principa
nhich that law seeks to impose. or 10
adagt III 10 pVczelt-day business require
yrenfz Thoss who desire TO acccmplisi
4lr aefal results by appropriate leglsia-
-fur ere DISPOSED to question the princ1ple
upcn which Inc Sherman law is founded,
and 10 INSIST that useful ends may be at
ftncd only through the laws moditca-
stun
lit is no light hing to set aside the
Blossoms ol history ara discard the eNpe-
nr1 el many generations. As the la'g
THOMAS 3 Ree3 has recently SAID: II
81 r- To move slowly in respect 10 grea
rrgs The mCuCpolies which were De
bounced BY The English Parliament II
and which were condemned by tht
ENGLISH courts Of that period are un-
er to the modern world The grant
5v the crown either in reward to Ia
.ostl or in consideration Of none.
sas rns.-7ts TO The treasury. Of the eNclu-
asz mali D manufacture ana *elld az
lFtxzle of merchandise. did create d mo
N In thz true sense Of The term,
.,-4rtfr,rs and npnrCssion r@sul8rt
rom these grants finally LED to their
ana ..ltDtlcss laIi the lpuada
m ar the original doctrine Of the Eng
s7-H .aarts that all contracts in restrain
et trade were void as against peeilc
paies
IA must be remembered that this wes
sa cernrarativCty rude age, whoa p"Po
tAuan vas scarce and scattered, mus tis,
ta82e aud when the idea OF ASSOCIATE
ACTON WAS foreign TO the average thoi'ShA
s.1finaert Nlth the advance IN so
y.ell-ta ini, the growth OF population,
.s,f business the in:erdepende1lce OF com
-a.relai pursuits began 10 be percei@eo
Presently the necessity arose loS rei@N
Ina 5n some degree the rigor& OF the rue
zf,-sf ,1l