The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-04-04
TRUSTS ARE DISCUSSED
(continued from Page one.l

SohAhutc Shlh duftIty, u0tn LHe antitrust law and of the imperfect pro visions of the act to regulate commerce. The first step taken was the prosecution of fourteen suits against the principal railroads of the Middle West, restraining them by Injunction from further viola lions of either of the laws in question.
 About the same time the case against the Northern Securities Company was initiated. This was corporation organized under the laws of the State Of New Jersey with a capital of four hundred million dollars. the alleged pur- pose being to control the Great Northern and the Northern Pacific Railroad com panies. two parallel and competing lines extending across the northern tier of States from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean. Whatever the purpose its consAmmation would have resulted in the control of the two great railway sys- tems upon which the people of the North. western States were so largely dependent for their supplies and to get their pro- ducts to market being pra ctically merged into the New Jersey corporation. The proposition. that these independent sys- tems of railroads should be merged under single control alarmed the people of the States concerned. lest they be sub jected to what they deemed monopoly of interstate transportation and the sup pression of competition. The Governors of the States most deeply affected held a meeting to consider how to prevent the merger becoming effective and passed resolutions calling upon the National Government to enforce the anti trust laws against the alleged combination. When these resolutions were referred to the Attorney General for consideration and advice, he reported that in his opinion the Northern Security Company and its control of the railroads mentioned was a combination in restraint of trade and was attempting a monopoly in violation of the national antitrust law. Thereupon suit in equity. which is now pending was begun by the government to test the valadity of this transaction under the Sherman law
 The Beef Trust.
 At nearly the same time the disclosures respecting the secret rebates enjoyed by the great packing house companies. coupled with the very high. price of meats. led the Attorney General to direct an investigation into the methods of the so o-called beef trust. The result was that he filed bills for Injunction against six of the principal packing house companies. and restrained them from which they would sell their products in States other than those in which their meats were prepared for market. Writs of injunction were issued accordingly, and since then, after full argument, the United States Circuit Court has made the injunction perpetual
 The cotton interests of the South, in- cluding growers, buyers and shippers, tnduP COnpldlnl IDdL they we're duIeFIHk great injury in their business from the methods of the Southern railroads in the handling and transportation of cotton. They alleged that these railroads. by combined action under pooling arrange ment to support their rate schedules, had denied to the shippers the right to elect oyer what roads their commodities should be shipped, and that by dividing upon fixed basis the cotton crop of the South all inducement to compete in rates for a fiOn fharanf aliUliNa Ad Proceedings were instituted hy the -Attor- ney General under the antitrust law, which resulted in the destruction of the pool and in restoring to the growers and shippers of the South the right to ship their products over any road they elected, thus removing the restraint upon the free dom of commerce.
 The Salt Combination.
 In November. 1902. the Attorney Gen eral directed that a bill for an injunction be filed in the United States Circuit Court at San Francisco against the Federal Salt Company-a corporation which had ben organized under the laws of an East ern State. but had its main office and and against a number of other com paniRs and persons constituting what was known as the salt trust. These lnjunc tlons were to restrain the execution of certaon contracts between the Federal Salt Company and the other defendants. by which the latter agreed neither 10 im- port. buy, or sell salt. except from and to the Federal Salt Company, and not to engage or assist in the production of salt west of the Mississippi River during the of such contracts. As the result of these agreements the price of salt had been advanced about four hun dred per cent. 4 temporary injunction order was obtained. which the defendants asked the court to modify on the ground that the anti-trust law had no applica- ton to contracts for purchases and sales within State. The circuit court over ruled this contention and sustained the position. This practically concluded the case. and 1t is understood that In consequence the Federal Salt |