The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-08-02
WHAT KANSAS CITY'S
EXPERIENCE WAS.

In Hopkins vs. United States, III u. s.,
SIS. the members of the Kansas City Live
sas City stockyards. located partly In
Kansas City, Kan, and partly in Kansas
City. Mo-. dealing on their own account
OF as commission merchants in live stock
ritories, to the owners of which they
often made advances before shipment.
They We're bound by articles of associaz
ton and bylaws, which, among other
things, fixed the minimum rates for com
missions. forbade the giving of informa-
ton of the condition of the market,
except under specified conditions, and
forbade all dealing with any person who
or with an expelled or suS
pended member. Held, that the bust
ness so transacted was not commerce,
although 1t furnished aids and facilities
to interstate commerce. The court said:
1.-The contract condemned by the statute
is one whose direct and immediate effect
is a restraint upon that kind OF trade or
commerce which is interstate. Charges
for such facilities as we have already
mentioned are not restraint upon that
trade, although the total cost Of market
creased. Charges for facilities furnished
have been held not a regulation of COM
merce, even when made for services rem
dered, or as compensation for benefits
conferred. Sands VS.. ManiStee River I'M
provement company, 123 U. S. 2S8; Monon--
gahela Navigation company VS.. United
States. 14S U. S. 312, 329, 339; Kentucky &
etc. r. R., 81 Fed. Rep. 567.''
In Anderson VS.. U. s., III U. 8. "a. the
facts were similar to those in the Hop
kins case last cited. The holding of the
court is expressed in the syllabus as fol-
lows:
"That where the subject matter of the
agreement does not directly relate to and
merce. and where the undisputed facts
clearly show that the purpose of the
agreement was not to regulate, obstruct or
restrain that commerce, but was entered
into with the object of properly and fairly
regulating the transaction of business in
which the parties to the agreement were
engaged, such agreement will be upheld
as not within the statute, where it can be
agreement are well calculated to attain
the purpose for which 1T was formed. and
where the effect of its formation and en-
forcement upon interstate trade or COM
merce is in any event but indirect and
incidental, and not its purpose and OBJ
ject.'
cites Pipe Trust Suit.
In Addystone Pipe & Steel company VS..
u. S., ITS U. S. I'll, six corporations en-
gagged in the manufacture. sale and trans
portation of iron pipe, and being located
in the states of Ohio. Kentucky, Tennes-
see and Alabama, entered into detailed
agreement, parceling among themselves
the business OF large number of cities
in Western and Southern states, with
the purpose and intent of largely increas-
ing the price at which iron pipe should be
furnished to such cities.
When any such city sought competitive
bids for iron pipe, the corporal ton en-
titled under this secret agreement to fur
nish such pipe would make It's bid much
above fair market price and the other
companies would present still higher bids
to give the appearance of competition
The company intended would thus get
the contract, but under the same agree
ment would have to pay a large bonus, to
be divided among the other companies
Although these corporations were manu-
facturers of iron pipe the particular
agreement had reference to the sale and
delivery of such pipe to municipal Gus
TONERS; its intended and direct effect be-
ing to exclude competition and raise the
price of the commodity. The court said:
Where the contract is for the sale of
the article and for it's delivery in another
state the transaction IS one of Interstate
: commerce, although the vendor may also
have agreed to manufacture It in order
to fulfill his contract of sale. In such
case a combination of this character would
be properly called a combination in re-
straint of interstate commerce, and not
one relating only to manufacture,
Effect of Sherman Law.
The proper construction of the Sherman
antitrust act, so far as it relates to rail-
road transportation, as deduced from
these decisions of the supreme court. ap-
pears to be this:
(a) The act applies to railroads. And