New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-03-24
PROSECUTION OF TRUSTS.
NO RADICAL ACTION.
Government Not Likely to More
Epcept iR FLagrant Cases.
fTEoz TIE raTsuNr BuHEAu.l

TTroz TBE TRIBUNE BUREAU
xuasbtnston. March 23-Competent legal au-
..,-s,i.s regard the decision OF the United States
r,,n-eroe Court in the Northern Securities case
=. onlx A OF far reaching importance In its ap-
-,cstiop 70 corporations engaged in restraining
s-..rstste commerce. but OF equal Importance in
asen,ns the scope and limitations OF lawful cor
-,-sts enterpr1ses In their judgment il has
.,..red the legal atmosphere thoroughly as
o. render altogether improbable any action on
,bs nat Of the government looking 20 q general
.-osacnssou OF the trusts. except in fragrant
cases.
EIGHT CASES PENDING.
xv,,h the merger case decided. the government
=. now interested IN the prosecution Of prsc-
,csllv only eight cases for violation Of the Anti
r4sst and Interstate Commerce laws. Popular
,r,erests H. Of course centred In The Beef Trust
r-osecution. which is now pending IN the United
e,s,es Supreme Court on appeal from the decree
Granting the injunction IL is unlikely that this
osse VIII be reached before the October term Of
The court
In the case OF the Jacksonville Wholesale
,srocersf Association the petition was fled on
September L. 1903. and the case is still pending
an the Circuit Court These two actions were
t-oueht for alleged violation OF the Sherman
Antitrust law.
Pending in the United States Supreme Court
Is the case of the Interstate Commerce Commits
sion against the Nashville Chattanooga and ST.
Louis Railroad in which the petition was fled
on November 2. 1900. in the Circuit Court for
the Northern District Of Ohio is the case OF the
Hay and Straw Classification Association
against the Lake Shore and Michigan South
ern Railroad, tn which the petition was FLED on
March 10. 1903. The Cotton Traffic cases against
the Atlantic Railway Company are pending in
the Circuit Court for the Northern District OF
Georgia. and indictments were found against
the Illinois Central railroad Company. The
latter case is now pending in the Circuit Court
for the Western District q Tennesses- In all
these cases unreasonable rates for transporta-
tion and the making OF unjust DETERMINATIONS
IN fsvor Of certain shippers against others
were charged.
Another case pending IN the United States
Supreme Court lie that OF the Interstate Com-
1neroe Commission against Baird. This is the
famous suit In which the coal carrying roads
were arralgned for extortionate rates for the
transportation Of coal from the coal fields TO the
sesbosrd. discrimination. and the pooling OF
their earnings 1t has been popularity supposed
that ". r. Hearst is prosecuting this case
whereas the fact is that he merely brought
Interstate Commerce Commission. which pro-
oeeded in the usual way TO investigate them
Petitions were fled before Judge Laooulbe ask
ing that witnesses be compelled to produce i'm
portant contracts bearing the Investigation
and answer certain questions The court de-
ooeo that the contracts IN question were ir-
relevant and not germsne 20 the inquiry An
appeal was taken. by direction OF the Attorney
General. 10 the United States Supreme Court
which was argued on March Z. There II rests.
This 10 a complete summary OF the prosecu-
uons OF corporations for violations OF the law
M which the Department Of Justice is now in
ferestsd and the status OF the cases indicates
Thai they have been expedited with ali inst
and reasonable csleriry In the opinion OF the
highest government officials Il is safe TO as
SINE that prosecutions against combina+,ons
n restraint Of trade VIII hsncefor1h be fnsti-
suited only when .ndisputable evidence OF vicious
~ Illegal operations. coming within the pro-
hioition OF the Antitrust law. il submitted
Without sufficient evidence Of this character Il
would obviously be frlitless> expensive and IN
sust 70 business interests 70 begin actions which
could only result in adverse decisions by the
United States Supreme Court
HOW SUITS ARE BROUGHT.
The steps leading up to the preparation Of
a case OF this kind are extremely interesting
In the ordinary course of procedure any indi-
v1dusl may make complaint TO United States
District Attorney that his business is being in
,ured by the operations OF a trust Il then be-
comes the duty OF that Official TO examine into
the facts. and. n found sufficient 70 sustain
an action. TO recommend 10 the Department OF
justice The institution OF suit. The depart
ment viii then examine the evidence with a
view 20 determining whether there was q com
BnstlOn 20 restrain interstate commerce in VIC
lation Of the Sherman Antitrust law and also
II The United States courts have jurisdiction.
n these facts are established. the preparation
q the bin is begun. On This rests the entire
prosecution, for IL the foundation be faulty the
superstructure must inevitably collapse. Com
fnercial combinations are found to be 80 varied
and involved in their character as TO require
the most careful study and research. Again. IL
IS necessary TO take into consideration the ex-
This demands minute examination OF the evil
dence IN order TO ascertain whether the action
81 the trusts comes within the inhibition OF the
Sherman Antitrust act. interpreted by the
United States Supreme Court.
From this Il can readily be seen that the
government desires to take action only when
justified by the facts and the law as. on the
one hand. 70 prevent any violation of the law.
enc. the other. 10 disturb as little possible
the legitimate business interests Of the country.
IL ls maintained by those who have made a
careful study OF the antitrust laws that q
monopoly may be said 70 exist but the charsc-
Ter Of the combination may be such 20 con-
70, production and manufacture rather than
N'slosa1lon and sale IN various States. The two