Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-10-10

move to their place of destination and
ends when they are sold The question
Therefore Is whether the mine workers.
combination constitutes restraint up
on such commerce,
THE view that II does not IS based
upon the contention that this combina-
ton affects only production Of coal
within the state and not shipments of
coal from one state 10 another II Is
submitted that this distinction Is with
out foundation In the law on facts.
1.-THE authority In support Of this view
upon which reliance Is principally
placed in the case OF the United States
VS. d, G.. knight company as T.. $. ~
In that ease several sugar rcAnories In
Pennsylvania had been united 90 one
organization The court held that this
consolidation Of Interests did not come
within the statute because II affected
merely the process Of manufacture and
had no necessary effect upon the shin
ment Of the manufactured product ont
of the state, 1t viii be seen that these
facts were widely different from those
involved in the present case
THE coal of the country ia the most
important subject Of It's interstate COM
merce The United Mine Workers con-
sists Of a combination Of persons en-
ployed IN the production Of coal In
many states Of the Union. It's object
Is to control the terms upon which
this subject of interstate commerce
may be produced at all, either for
state or interstate shipments, Its direct
and necessary effect IS that no coal
shall be shipped anywhere within the
country unless II so permits, This
combination, therefore, not merely re-
strains but destroys Interstate COM
merce by preventing the existence Of
the subject matter Of such commerce
Of general public interest and import
ancc No more effective or radical re-
staint of interstate commerce could
be- imagined. The Delaware & Hudson
company was charactered by the state
or New York on April %. 1928 GU for the
purpose, as expressed In ts charter,
of furnishing to the state Of New York
a supply Of coal found In the state of
Pennsylvania As the result Of the
mine workers organization, the inter-
state commerce Of this corporation has
been for the time being, in great part
destroyed Obviously combination
which has this direct effect upon an
established interstate business Is In
every sense a restraint thereon
accordingly, since the Knight case,
Il has been settled that combinations
which have the effect Of restraining
shipments out Of the state are within
the prohibition Of the statute, In Ad-
dystun pipe company VS. United States
u15. T.. s. 22) there was a combination
Of manufacturers within certain states
which restrained shipments 10y the par
ties out Of their respective
states in competition with each other.
The court said CP-2sO)
The direct and immediate re-
suit Of the combination was there
fore. necessarily a restraint upon state
commerce in respect Of articles manu-
featured by any Of the parties TO 1t
to be transported beyond the state In
which they 'Nere made In Chesapeake
A. Ohio Fuel company VS. United states
O15 Fed Rep.5l0) there was q comblna-
ture out Of the state, save upon terms
certain territory to sell all their pro-
duct TO one corporation and the product
was In the natural course Of business
Skinned TO other states, Both Of these
combinations We're held unlawful for
the reason that they restrained the
movement of the products Of manufac-
lure out of the state, same upon terms
dictated by the parties 70 the comblna-
ton. II the fact that combination
has that direct and necessary eject
brings il within the statute its form u
of no importance for the statute says
that every such combination Is Illegal.
As already said the Mine workers
combination does rot merely restrain
interstate commerce, but abso
DESTROYS H. can II be seriously claimed
that while a combination which re-
strains shipments OF the st'te would be
illegal one which absolutely prevents
them would not? Manifestly the great
or includes the less and a combination
which directly and Immediately de-
stroys interstate commerce prevent
inc the existence Of Us subject
matter is quite as Illegal ms
one which merely restraints me
shipments of such matter ont OF me
state. otherwise a combination which
restrained interstate commerce would
| he unlawful while one which destroyed
n would be beyond the reach OF the
law II is submitted that the national
jurisdiction is subject TO no such linz
! itation
1T seems very clear, therefore, that
q suit would lie against the members
of The United Mine Workers associa-
| lion as combination I'm restraint OF
interstate commerce within the act or
Jure .. 1890. and that a preliminary
Injunction would be granted which
could he enforced by all the power Of
the national government. This precise
-