New-York tribune., 1903-04-12
Financial.
The Financial World.

might have been trouble: for the rn-rxst VA.
! not robust to say the least ard IN conditio,
! 70 stand so startling blow withosIs Gincasnz
| As It Is the outlook FOR the coming week IS res
specially cheerful At any rate. u would seem
| that small hope remains for that rally on tha
/ technical position Of the market which seemed
| 70 have got well started about the time the
! decision came along
| The difficulty is that we don't know where
! we are at The more the decision is studied
the more sweeping it seems to be; and az i'm
| portant in it's own sphere as was the famous
Dred Scott decision BY It. the sherman Anti
| Trust law (Which came into existence as un-
adulterated party politics. looms up IS an r.
strunnent for unse:tling the relations OF the
railroad world to an extent undreamed Of. A.
ready IL IS intinnated from Washington that the
anthracite coal roads will be the next objects
of judicial inquiry. 1t is certain that under
this decision the Pennsylvania Company car
not legally hold it's Baltimore & Ohio stock.
or at least vote il; and the 3. & O. controls
| Reading II settles the Union Pacific ard south
err Pacific dispute just as completely. And the
| list can be greatly extended; so that We may
say again-ve don't know where We are at
II must be remembered that when enacted N
1890 the Antitrust Law was supposed 70 aim
| only at industrial combinations. trusts -
trav then began to be called. and about whicn
there was already much popular agitation. The
railroads were not thought Of since they were
under multitude Of State regulations Il was.
| Therefore with some asJOnishment the business
| world heard that the first action taken under the
brand new law was suit TO dissolve the Trans
Missouri Traffic Assocfat atfon: and it was ceclaref
| an Illegal combination under this law Thsn
followed similar action against the Trank Lines
| Association, and that was declared Illegal
| These and other traffic associations were aoso-
| 1uteIy necessary in some form other. for the
~ye mas -F in
| terchangeabIe business between the leading
roa ds in their respective territories The courts
| having declared them Illegal. the business World
decided they were practical necessities. and this
decision stood
| Outward compliance with the law vas made
| by changing the form OF the various associa-
| tons. the substance remained; and the whole
| thing as against the railroads, was tacitly
dropped from that time till the institution OF the
| suit against the Northern Securities COMPANY
| period Of years in which the most far reaching
| changes have taken place in the railroad system
OF the country
Considering that the decisions referred 20 were
both nullifed in their essential features by the
| dominant pressure of economic necessity. viii
not this Securities decision be similarly nulr-
| fed?
Yes ard no. a temporary disturbance OF
| business interests must inevitably be conse-
| ouence: a permanent disturbance VIII not be
| tolerated. The insistent demand Of the COM
nunity for the speediest. cheapest and most
efficient transport Of material and the same
| with personal comfort of individuals, viii nuh-
| fy the decision far as it puts bar against
compliance with this demand. The declaration
that related railroads cannot be united under
single management does put such bar TINS
| is provab1e by the patent facts OF our national
railroad development.
But such nuIlihcation will not extend 70 the
Interpretation which the court gives Of the
powers OF the Federal authority over inter
State commerce On this question the court
goes beyond previous decisions, which, however.
fortify it, and puts all routes Of interstate
commerce under the same Constitutional control
IS the navigabIe waters. This appears in the
following dietum:
is supreme ia reaching and acknowledge TO
limitations other than such prescribed II
the constitution ltSelT-
The Constitution says briefly and eompre-
hensiveIy: Congress shall have power 10 regu-
late commerce betweep the States" Ihis short
phrase is as comprehensively forcibIe as the
more extended clause conferring jurisdiction
over the navigable waters-the only important
routes of interstate commerce existent AT the
time the Constitution adopted But until
this decision came, the court never affirmed the
existence of such a power. in so broad and
sweeping terms
Here il may be interjected that such an in
depreciation of the Constitution, as enforced
bv the statute under consideration. is lOsicaL
and in absolute accord with the healthy devel-
opnent of the body polite; which necessitates
that all institutions growing too great for eff
cient regulation by the States. shall pass into
Federal control.
The deduction from the state OF facts pre-
sented by the decision. is that henceforth Fed
eraI control of interstate railroads is supreme
All State regulations Of such railroads. not
strictly municipal in their character. are made
subject to the approval of the Federal aUthori-
ty, viz. Congress- which can allow. reject. con-
firm abrogate any or all
/ A further and future development Of this con-
dition, points to all corporations engaged main
Iy in Interstate commerce. operating under
Federal charters.
Summing up this revolutionary decision, as
some have stigmatized it: or evolutionary" as
it may be more correctly described. we may
separate the permanent and the ephemeral ele-
ments. thus:
Permanently. it takes legal control OF the rail-
road system of the country from State. and
places it in practical entirety under Federal
authority.
Its ephemeraI part is the bar on the unihca-
tion of parallel and competing roads" This
! crude and ineffective mechanical device to pro
tect the public, is bound TO be wiped from the
statute books. II is. applied TO our national
railroad system. an anachronism and an ae-
surdity: ineffective for good. ard potential for
harm The protection of the public is to be
found in the regulation Through properly con
stituted courts or Boards of the operation OF
the railroads not in the ownership OF the prop