The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1903-04-17

two railroads on the ground that
this would be 4 violation of the
Minnesota law, but the Supreme
Court of the United States declined
to intervene on the grounds that it
was without jurisdiction. Then the
Attorney General of the United States
applied to the United States Circuit
Court to enjoin the Northern Sc
curities Company from acquiring the
two roads on the ground that this
would be a violation of the anti
trust law of1S9O. The Circuit Court
of Appeals, by the unanimous action
of all four judges, decided to grant
this injunction and it is said that the
case will now be carried to the Su-
preme Court of the United States as
a tribunal of last resort.
The two roads were parallel and
competing lines. The stock of the
Chicago, Burlington and Quincy
Railroad and their relations to other
Pacific Railroads fell only a little
short of being merger. The ques-
ton before the court did not direct
ly involve anything beyond the right
of a holding company to acquire the
Great Northern and the Northern
Pacific. The point raised before the
Court was whether this were COM
bination in restraint in trade. The
Supreme Court has heretofore, in
two other cases, held that the anti
trust law applied to railroad COM
binations and these decisions were
made to fit this particular case.
Efforts were made to show that
rates had not been raised, facilities
had not been lessened, and, in point
of fact, trade had not been restrained.
The Court took the ground that the
future could not be guaranteed, and,
therefore, could not take cognizance
of these facts.
On the other hand it was shown
that rates might have been reduced
or facilities increased had the roads
remained independent. Apart from
this, the act of consolidation of COM
petition must be held to be in re-
straint of trade in the ordinary sense
and in the legal sense of words. The
old maxim competition is the life
of trade" could not apply when the
two corporations were under a single
ownership. 1t was apparent that
the public could not obtain conces-
sions from the rival corporation
under the existing circumstances and
that it was plain that there could be
no reason for the merger unless it was
to prevent the option of the shipper.
Efforts to enforce the Sherman
antitrust law, lame though it is,
have almost always met with success.
This makes the criticism. on the adj
1ninistration that much more severe,
when it is plain to be seen that the
inaction was either on account of the
friendliness ofthose in power towards
the trusts, or, even worse than thu +,
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, while the peoples
rights were being bartered away. If
the Sherman Act had been freely used
at the inception of the trusts, it
would have been much easier to have
destroyed these different restraints
of trade. AS it is now, they are
strongly entrenched behind millions
of capital and frequent dividends,
all of which will render future action
ofthe officers of the law more difficult.
The Democratic part stands pledged
not only to pass remedial legislation
but also to promptly enforce existing
statutes. 1t is not yet too late if a
firm and vigorous stand should be
taken against the trusts by those
whose sworn dutyit is. The Republi-
cans can hardly be expected to en-
force this law in an impartial manner
when these aggregations of capital
are the most liberal contributors to
their campaign fund. The people
only have themselves to blame. If
they wish certain methods and
policies to be pursued they must put
in power All administration which
is friendly to their desires. Whether
or not they will do it, remains to be
seen, but it is worse than folly to
vote the Republican ticket and then
raise an outcry when it redeems its
implied promises to its promoters.
GOOD ROADS MOVEMENT.
The neiphborinp State of PennSyl-