Tazewell Republican. [volume] (Tazewell, Va.) 1892-1919, 1903-03-05
Congress and Trusts.
Philadelphia Press.

Philadelphia Press.
The Supreme Court has plainly had the
recent antitrust legislation within lts
judicial horizon in it's decision passing on
the lottery cases. Its decision supports
the laws lust passed almost az directly and
explicitly as if they we're before the court
Congress, in 1895, prohibited the trans
mission of lottery tickets from one state
to another by express or otherwise. Gan
Congress prohibit as well as regulator Can
this power to prohibit be exercised on
moral or "police' grounds or must 1t De
restricted to commercial reasons? Can the
prohibition apply to an article like lot
tery ticket, which only creates a con-
tracturaI relation and to which objection
can only exist on moral grounds?
These three questions the .'Supreme
Court answers in the affirmative. Whether
Congress could "arUitrarily exclude from
commerce among the States any ar'lcle'
commolit or thing of value, however
useful or valuable, which it chose the
court refuses to cay until such Legislation
is before it, except that the power to regu'
commerce, although plenary, cannot Oe
deemed arbitrary, since it is subject 10
such limitations as are prescribed by the
Constitution.
The natural conclusion is, therefore, as
Chief Justice Fuller says in his dissenting
onin,on. that while in foreign commerce
Congress, legislating "for a sovereign
nation, can exclude foreign persons or
commodities between the States, the right
If passage of persons or property cannot
be prohibited by Congress" arbitrarily
This view the majority opinion tends to
sustain. But anything not "arbitrary
Congress may do in regulating commerce.
Its power extends to all objects Of tralhc
and sale, independent of intrinsic value
and the fact that lottery ticket is bought
and sold is enough to bring it within tue
power of Congress, the court overrullng OF
rather defining its earlier view that an In
surance nolicy creating contractural rela'
tons was not interstate commerce. APP
parentv the contract is not; but the ma
terial instrument recording the contract 49,
as it CT losses the State line, subject OF
commerce.
In such regulation the power OF Con
gres is "plenary, complete in itself and
may be exercised by Congress to Its
utmost extent, subject only to such limi
tations as the Constitution imposes. D"
These limitations ar, as the court else
vhere says, the right.of every citizen s"t(
Re free to nse his.lfaculties in TALL Lawful
WAYS. to live and work where be will, tC
f earn his livelihood by any, lawful calling
to pursue any livelihood or avocatlon apC
for that purpose to enter into any con
2 tracts whatever"
, But in all this Congress is to judge VIVA
y is lawful If it holds lottery tickets IN
q furious it can prohibit them from passing
+ from State to State. The power to decld'
= is "vested in Congress'as absolutely as ]
would be in single government" MANI
n testify. then, Congress can impose any con
J.. ditions. not "arbitrary," on.the entranc
Y of any person or corporation into inter
state commerce. 1t can, as in the Hanna
Y Nelson amendment to the Department o
i Commerce act, require report from ever.
d corporation shipping goods. II 1t cal
shut out lottery ticket, on moral ground
it could on public grounds exclude an.
article of commerce made by corporation
which had refused the reports deemed
necessary by Congress or whose monopol!
of a trade was held contrary to publ
+ policy bv Congress. 1t is probable, though
2 less certain, that, as in the Littleheld bill
e Congress can lay its hand on the price o
< any article in interstate commerce.
l Such regulation, in short, as a slngl'
& government" can impose Congress cal
= mposeion,commerce between the States
l Such Adhesion takes long step forwarC
: in establishing plenary power IN dealing
, with trusts whose only limit is the con
stitutional discretion of Congress.