The Savannah morning news., 1903-04-11

Philadelphia. April 1O.-James NJ.
Beck, assistant attorney general who
argued the Northern Securities case
and the recently decided lottery cases
for the government. when questioned
to-day as to the scope Of the decision
in the former case, said:
"Disclaiming any purpose to express
any opinion but my own, the clear and
exhaustive opinion of Judge Thayer
seems to me to leave nothing to be
desired in the matter of a full exposi-
ton of the federal law applicable to
the consolidation of competing inter-
state carriers.
"An interests should welcome such
result, for it seems to me of first i'm
portance that the exact meaning of ex-
listing statutory law should be definite
ly ascertained. When so ascertained,
the question of the wisdom of the stat
utes can be fairly debated in the great
er court of public opinion. The de-
cision of the Circuit Court accomplish
ed this purpose. 1t destroys the last
legal device for the suppression of
competition, and shifts the whole ques-
ton from the courts to the people, and
leaves for their consideration and ulti-
mate decision the question whether
railroad consolidation under proper
regulation is desirable, or whether 1t
should be altogether prohibited.
The wild suggestion that this de-
cision is revolutionary and viii dis
rupt the American railway system IS
absurd. 1t simply reaffirms existing
principles and has no application what
ever to legitimate extensions of rail-
way lines, but solely applies to the
suppression of competition by railway
consolidation.
Judge Thayers decision, in effect,
demonstrates the inaccuracy of the
phrase holding company and also
shows that the community of inter-
est plan through stock ownership,
when ii suppresses competition ana
promotes monopoly, is unlawful. 1t
holds in substance that whenever the
control of competing interstate car
riers is secured, either by combina-
ton of natural persons or by a cor
poration which they create and the
motive for competition has thus been
destroyed by the consequent unity of
interest, the antitrust law is Vio-
lated.
The fact that each of the competing
lines is nominally operated by a sep
arate board of directors is held i'm
material, and the court, disregarding
form and looking to substance, holds
that the real policy of railroad is
controlled by those who own the ma
jor1ty of it's stock and that such in
diVidual holders in a real sense de-
termine all important corporate acts.
The decision is also of first i'm
portance in holding that the mere own
ership of stock in an interstate rail-
road brings the owner in such direct
relation with interstate commerce as
to subject him to the plenary powers
of the federal government with respect
thereto. Perhaps this holding gives
the decision it's greatest importance.
THE defendants attorneys contend
ed that the mere acquisition of such
shares had either no direct relation
to interstate commerce, or that, in
any event, such relation was indirect,
collateral and remote. They sought
to esta blish an unsound distinction be-
tween ownership of a road and its
operation This view the court Mega
tiVes and holds that the purchase of
shares of stock in an interstate rail-
way subjects the purchaser to the con-
stitutional power of the federal gov
ernment.
The Importance of this holding,
coming as it does, upon the heels of
the lottery cases, cannot we'll be over
estimated. 1t greatly widens the scope
of federal activity The constitution
remains unchanged, but the sphere of
human action, to which it is applied,
is by means of wholly exterior forces,
greatly widened.
when the constitution was framed,
the only media of interstate commune
cation were the cOastWise sailing YES
sells and the occasional stage coach,
which crossed state lands, but steam
and electricity have indissolubly
bound the states together by links of
steel, aggregating in the matter OF