Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1902-04-11
THB NORTHERN SECURITIES
COMPANY.
New York SUM-

The Federal Supreme Court has de-
cidcd that the effort of the State of
Minnesota to prevent the Northern Sc
curities Company, a citizen of New
Jersey, from buying the controlling in
terest of two Minnesota railroads, the
Great Northern and the Northern Pa
ciiic, is not for the Court to notice. If
the New Jersey citizen had damaged !
Minnesota the Court would have deter
mined the remedy; but It is quite an
other thing to be asked to lay the
Federal hand upon a Jerseyman mere
ly for disregarding in New Jersey a
Minnesota statute.
This case having been thus disposed |
Of, so far as the Supreme Court is con- |
Cerned. the announced intention of !
the Attorney Generals to disrupt the |
Northern Securities Company, through |
the Sherman Antitrust law. and to
defeat the company's purpose to ac-
puire and administer the Northern Pa
tilic and the Great Northern, next de-
mands attention.
The decisions of the Supreme Court
in the Trans-M Missouri case and in the
Joint Traffic Association case have
been cited in support of the Attorney
Generals prospective endeavor. In or
der that the situation may be under
stood we will quote the most decisive
passage of the law in question and
then briefly outline the theory on
which the Northern Securities Com
pany may be expected to defend itself.
The language Of the act of Congress
prohibiting restraint of interstate
commerce is that every contract or
combination in the form of trust or
otherwise, OF conspiracy in restraint of
trade or commerce among the several
States, is hereby declared to be lille
gal"
The Trans-Missourl and Joint Traf-
&c Association cases involved contracts
between Independent carriers for the
purposes of restricting competition in
rates. So too, the Addyston Pipe
Company case involved a contract be-
tween independent producers limiting
competition in an interstate business.
In each instance the restraint of inter-
state business was the direct and prac-
tically the only object. The rule gov
erning those cases was stated by Mr..
Justice Peckham. in the Addyston
Pipe Company litigation. II was IN I
the Sherman act covers merely trans
actions which directly and substan-
TALLY. and not merely indirectly, re-
mOtely. incidentally and collaterally,
/. Ia, nj In
nocent purposes, regulate to a greater
OF less degree commerce among the
States
The direct and substantial object of
the present transaction was the acqui-
sition by the Securities Company OF
the shares of the two railroad COM
panies concerned. The results which
= may follow therefrom will be, accord
/ ing to the theory to be opposed to the
Attorney General, indirect, remote,
incidental and collateral" and not,
therefore. bringing the enterprise with
in the prohibition of the statute.
In the Joint Traffic Association case,
in response to a suggestion of coun.
sci. the Supreme Court said that the
act did not apply to combinations OF
= interest and property by those engaged
in the same line of business, whether
effected by formation of corporations
or copartnerships, by employment OF
the same selling agencies or by sale OF
= property to one of the parties. Any
e restraint of interstate commerce fol-
lowing such action the Court said
would be merely collateral and Incl.
dental and, therefore, not subject to
, the statute.
This view necessarily follows from
= the Constitutional provision that no
person shall be deprived of liberty or
property without due process of law
This guaranty includes the right free
p ly to sell and purchase property.
If the statute should be construed TO
prohibit the sale of property, II would
to that extent destroy its value, and
thus deprive the owners there of with
out due process of law. The Supreme
Court has, therefore, held that Con.
gress can prohibit contracts directly
restraining interstate commerce, but
that It cannot prohibit the transfer OF
property merely Because the ultimate
result may be to effect such a restraint.
Such must be the general argument
in support of a scheme like that of the
Northern Securities Company. When
the Supreme Court comes to consider
it, it will consider perhaps the most
important case, commercially, ever
brought before it. 1t is unnecessary to
say that an earthquake under most IL
not all of the great railroad systems
of the country would be less harmful
TO them and their allied interests than
q judgment holding that the Sherman
act applies to the many transactions
of which the Northern Securities Com.
pany is type.
-
ALTGELD ANDTHEANARcHISTS
3 BTOOklVn Standard 4 'nion 1