Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1904-04-29
The Merger Decision and Its Eject.

The decision OF the federal supreme
court that the merger OF the Northern
Pacific and Great Northern railroads
was in violation of the Sherman anti
trust law is no new judicial reading of
the act OF 1890, but reatIirmation of
the courts previous rulings. The same
principle was even more cogently as
serted i'll the transmisSouri ease Of
1897.
The courts finding has been more
generally commented upon by the press
of the country than any legal decision
in recent Years. The comments are
varied, instructive and significant. A
few are herewith reprinted as showing
the general tenor of public sentiment
on the decision and its effects upon
the commercial interests Of the coun-
try.
The New York Tribune thinks that
the decision is likely to be check upon
''plans for benevolent control Of other
peoples property which have been
highly popular in financial circles and
much advertised as the safeguard Of
national prosperity" and says:
1t will certainly bring home to the peo-
pie renewed sense of the responsibility
of corporations to the law and the ade-
quacy of the United States government to
control the great combinations which new
forces and new industrial and commercial
conditions have invested with eXtraordi-
nary powers, for the regulation of which
1t has sometimes seemed If the law
had, through lack of foresight. made no
provision. Such a decision is not disor-
ganizing. but highly conservative in it's
tendency.
While regarding the Sherman law it
self as "a very crude and imperfect act
of legislation" the New York Evening
Post thinks the administration per
formed public service in appealing to
it, and says:
The country now knows. at any rate
what defense it has against the more dan
gerous development of the consolidation
theory. If a better weapon be needed. 1t
is for congress to forge 1t for us.
The New York Times, while admit
ting that 1.-The language of the law and
previous decisions of the court left
nature of the decision takes a decid-
edly pessimistic view Of its effect upon
the commercial interests of the country
and says:
Congress has before it no business COM
parable in Importance and urgency with
the duty of providing a prompt remedy
for the mischief done by this act, passed
fourteen years ago. We have restraints OF
trade upon every hand. Copyrights and
patents restrain trade; trade is restrained
by the attempt Of the manufacturer to
get for his product more than 1t has cost
him. All these things are lawful. But IL
is not lawful to attempt to create an in
s<- terstate transportation system dong pusl-
ness on q large scale and sheltered from
those sources Of attack and of wealn.
which have brought innumerable rail-
roads to bankruptcy and have caused g
far more serious economic loss to the ma
ton than it ever has suffered or ever viii
suffer from such technical restraints OF
trade as were involved in the building uI
of the great system in the northwest
Adequate protection for the public, aDou
whose rights Justice Harlan is so properly
solicitous may be secured-is already
within reach-through states forbiddinl
extortionate rates anG unjust discrlmina
tons.
The New York World insists that thu
supreme court has proved itself "th'
protector of the people against trusts
and says:
But in the last analysis it is not tn
president who has triumphed. 1t Is no
the court. It is not the law. 1t Is tn
people-the plain people who elect presi
Il cat through