New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-03-15
ANTITRUST ACT UPHELD.

At this point Justice Harlan announced the
inability OF the court to concur I'm the view that
the Antitrust act is repugnant to the Consti-
tution Of the United states. The contention OF
tho defendant" he said. could not be sustained
without in effect overrullng the prior decisions
Of this court to the scope and validity OK
the Antitrust act
of as the court has held. Congress can strike
down q combination between private persons
or private corporations that restrain trade
amone the States in iron pipe or in tiles, CRATES
and rnanteIs, surely il ought not TO be doubted
that Congress has power to declare illegal
combination that restraints commerce among
the States and with foreign nations as carried
on over the lines of competing railroad COM
panies in the exercise Of public franchises and
engaged in such commerce.
Proceeding further in propoundins this line of
argument. he said:
Indeed. IL the contentious Of the defendants
ave sound why may not all the railway COrnpa-
mics in the United States that engaged I'M
der state charters. In Interstate and nterua-
tjoual commerce. enter into combination sucn
rs the one here in question and by the device OF
holding corporation obtain the absolute control
throughout the entire country of rates for pas
sengcrs and freight, beyond the power or Con-
gress 20 protect the public against their eNac-
rious2 The argument in behalf Of the defend
ants necessarily leads to such results and places
Congress, although invested ny the people OF
the United States with fun authority to regu-
late Interstate and international commerce, III
condition of utter helpIessness, so far as the
protection Of the public against such combina-
tons is concerned
STATE RIGHTS NOT INVADED.
Coming again to the consideration Of the con-
tentlon that interference by the federal govern
neut with the affairs Of a State corporation Will
prevent the securities company from exercising
its functions. and VIII be an invasion OF the
rights OF the state under which the company
was chartered. he said:
we cannot conceive how It IS possible FOR
any one 10 seriously contemplate such propo-
siuon." Continuing this line, he said:
We reject any such view Of the relations Of
the national government and the States com
posing the Union IL cannot be given erect
withou. destroying the Just authority OF the
United States. Every corporation created by a
state is necessarily subject To the supreme law
Of the land. And yet the suggestion Is inaae
that 20 restrain a State corporation from inter
merce among the States, IN violation OF an act
Of Congress- is hostile TO the reserved rights OK
the States. The federal court may not nave
power to forfeit the charter OF the seruFlu's
company. e may not declare how its shares OF
stock may be transferred on its BOOKS nor pro
hihit II from acquiring real estate, nor diminish
or increase its capital stock All these and Ike
matters are 20 he regulated by the state which
created the company. But TO the end that effect
be given 20 the national VIII, as lawfully e.
pressed by Congress. So may prevent that COM
pary, iu fits capacity as a holding corporation
q combination formed in restraint OF interstate
commerce. Tho securities company Is lSelt a
part II that combinations its head and front, its
trustee II would be extraordinary II the court,
iu executing the act o. Congress. could not lay
hands upon that company and prevent it from
doing that which n done. viii defcat the act
81 Congress Upon Ike grounds tho court. with
cut interfering wltE The rights Of any state,
can. by appropriate orders. prevent the TWO
connecting railroad companies here involved
from .u-uuaIatlaE with tho securities company
i1 restraining commerce among the States. In
..F...r O..