The sun., 1903-04-14
The New Politics-A Political Cam.
paign Begun by the Depart-
ment OF Justice.

VI
Mr.. BECK, the member OF the stan
Of the Attorney-General at Washington
who hae displayed so much efficiency and
gained 90 much success in the conduct
before the Federal courts Of important
Government cases arising in the modern
campaign against corporations and as
ISOLATED capital and who is now fresh
from another triumph in the prosecution
Of the Northern Securities Company and
its organizers, is reported TO have re-
marked recently:
The decision Of the Circuit Court of Appeals
accompnshes this purpose II destroys the last
legal device for the suppression of competition.
and shifts the wsoe question from the courts 10
the people. and leaves for their consideration and
ultimate decision the question whether railway
consolidation under proper regulation, is desirable
or whether 1t should be altogether prohibited
It will be noted that the prosecuting
officer of the United States does not al
lude to a device in restraint OF trade,
which last are the operating words and
the gist Of the Antitrust law, but uses
language not in the statute, the substi-
tuted words being the suppression OF
competition. The two phrases may
and may not be identical in legal effect,
but the Beck phrase, although treated
in the recent opinion Of the court in the
Northern Securities case a. the squiva-
lent in every respect Of restraint Of
trade was not employed in 1890 by the
lawmakers.
1t ID to be assumed that Mr.. BECK did
not speak unadvisedly and that he Ut
tered the wishes of his chief, and thereby
of the President, when he affirmed that
the recent decision invites the people
to take up again the question Of . railway
consolidation and make their wishes
known. The court Of appeal to which
he refers is not the Supreme Court, but
Congress acting under and executing the
mandate Of the voters in the several
States
His utterance is startling and full OF
significance. The issue, as Mr.. BECK
puts it, ia this:
Shall railway consolidation be prop
erly regulated, or be altogether pro-
hibited?"
The inference is that. under the Sher-
man Antitrust law, as recently inter-
preted by the President, the Attorney
Oeneral and the four Judges Of the Eighth
Judicial circuit, railway consolidation
has been abolished, whether II be reason
aba or unreasonable. and whether or
not IL enlarges and increases trade, and
an era Of cut-throat competition con-
Quoted BY subordinate trafiic agents is
to b revived, with all the horrors Of gam
bling Spectators sweeping into their
nets the oldest and most wisely managed,
for owners and users alike, OF our rail-
way corporations.
In what manner and by what methods
can the new campaign by The voters. TO
which so conspicuous q member of the
stat Of the Department Of Justice invites
the country. be begun and conducted
unless there be searching popular exam
ination OF the recent decision and Of the
phrase restraint Of trade without
which. directly applied and proven by
witnesses, there cannot be punished an
offence against the Antitrust law? Must
parallel railways ever and always COM
pete by cutting rates in order to promote
and not restrain trade, and therefore
and thereby be lawful railways? II the
New York Central and Hudson River
railway acquires and manages the West
Shore railway, must the consolidated
ownership and control be judicially de-
nounced as criminal. and denounced as
matter Of mere judicial inference. with
out clear proof by witnesses testifying
that trade is thereby suppressed. re-
strained and kept back, which, under a
separate management, would rise up,
demanding life and liberty?