Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-03-15
THE MERGER DECISION
Strong Expression Used by
Justice Harlan.
THE FEDERAL POWER
NOT INTENDED TO INTERFERE
WITH RIGHT OF STATE.
To Prevent Combination in Violation
of Law - Dissenting Views of
Justices Holmes and White.

The vigorous and forcible language of AS
sociate Justice Harlan in presenting the
opinion of the United States Supreme Court
yesterday afternoon in the case of the
Northern Securities Company was COM
mented upon today by attorneys who have
carefully watched these proceedings. The
salient points of the decision were given IN
The Star yesterday afternoon.
Referring to the claim that the position
OF the government amounts to declaring
that the ownership of stock in a railroad
| corpora ton is in itself interstate commerce,
he said:
1--WE do not understand that the govern
ment makes any such contentious or takes
any such positions as those statements
imply. 1t does not contend that Congress
| call control the mere ownership of stock
| in state corporation engaged In interstate
commerce. 1t does not contend that Con-
| gless can control the organization OF mere
ownership of state corporations authorized
by their charters to engage in interstate
and internationa commerce. But 1t does
contend that Congress may protect the
freedom of interstate commerce by any
means that are appropriate and tnat are
| lawful and not prohibited by the Constr
| tuition. 1t does contend that no state cor
poration can stand in The way of the en-
forcement of the national will, legally eX-
pressed. What the government particularly
complains of, indeed, all that 1T complains
| Of here. is the existence of a comblnatlon
among the stockholders of competing rail-
| road companies which in violanon OF the
aci of Congress restraints interstate COM
merce through the agency OF a common
corporate trustee designated to act Tor
both companies in depressing free compet-
ton between them.
Not Interfering With State Affairs.
On the contention that the government is
Interfering with state affairs by preventing
the securities company from exercising It's
function. Justice Harlan declared:
1--WE reject any such view of the relations
of the national government and the states
composing the Union. 1t cannot be given
effect without destroying the just authority
of the United States. Every corporation
created by state is necessarily SUBJECT 10
the supreme law of the land. And yet inc
suggestion is made that to restrain state
corporation from interfering with the Tree
| course of trade and commerce among tne
states in violation of an actor Congress, is
hostile to the reserved rights or the states
The federal court may not have power u
forfeit the charter of the securities com
pauy: il may not declare now IT'S snares VI
stock may be transferred on It's DOCKS hol
prohibit it from acquiring real estate, mo-
din inish or increase its capital STOCK. Al
these and like matters are to be regulated
by the state which created the company.
But to the end that effect be given 10 tne
national will, as lawfully expressed py Soi On
eress il may prevent that company, IN It's
csnacity as a holding corporation ana tfus'
tee from carrying out the purposes oI d
combination formed in restraint OF inter-
state commerce. . .,
"The securities company is itself part
of that combina tion its head and front, It's
! trustee 1t would be extraordinary IL the
court in executing the act OF Congress,
could not lay hands upon that company
| and nrevent il from doing that which, II
done will defeat the act OF Congress. upon
like grounds the court, without interfering
with the rights of any state, can, by appro-
pirate orders, prevent the two competing
railroad companies here involved from CO.
operating with the securities company III
restraining commerce among the states
I'm short the court may make any order
necessary to bring about the dissolution OF
suppression of an illegal combination that
Restraints interstate commerce. All this can
be done without infringing in any degree
upon the just authority of states. Inc
affirmance of the judgment below VIII only
mean that no combination, however pow
erful is stronger than the law or VIII be
permitted to avail itself of the pretext
that to prevent it doing that which, II done,
would defeat a legal enactment of Con-
gress, is to attack the reserved rights OF
the states. 1t would mean that no device
in evasion of it's provisions, however skill
! fully such device is contrived, and no COM
bination, by whomsoever formed, Is beyond
| the reach of the supreme law of the land,
| If such device or combination by its oper-
alton directly restraints commerce among
the states or with foreign nations in VIOLA
| ton of the act of Congress.
Right of Federal Control.
Speaking further of the right of federal
| control over state direction In cases in
| volving interstate commerce, he said:
There is no reason to suppose that Con-
gress had any purpose to interfere with
| the internal affairs of the states, nor is
hot for hs.
| ton that the antitrust act regulates their
| domestic commerce. By it's very terms the
act regulates only commerce among the
| states and in the foreign states. Viewed
| in that light, the act must be respected.
By the explicit words of the Constitution
| that instrument and the laws enacted by
| Congress in pursuance of its provisions
| are the supreme law of the land, anything
| in the Constitution or the laws of any
| state to the contrary Notwithstanding,
| supreme over the states, over the courts
| and even over the people of the United
| States, the source of all power under our
| governmental system in respect of the OBJ
| jects for which the Constitution was or
| dained. An act of Congress, constitutional
| ly passed under its power to regulate COM
| merce among the states and with foreign
| states, is binding upon all as much SO as
| If 1t were embodied in terms in the Con-
| sttution itself Every judicial officer,
| whether of national state court, Is
| under the obligations of an oath to so re-
BaTu lawful enactment OF congress. NOT
| even state, still less one of it's artificial
| creatures. can stand in the way of it's en-
| forcement. If it We're otherwise, the gov
| eminent and its laws might be Frustrated
| at the feet of local authority"
| $50 long Congress keeps within the
| limits of its authority as defined by the
| Constitution, infringing no rights recog-
| nized or secured by that instrument, it's
| regulations of interstate and international
| commerce, whether founded in wisdom or
not. must be submitted to by all. Mischief,
| and only mischief can come from the fail
| ure of the courts to recognize this funda-
mental principle of constitutional construc-
ton. To depart from 1t because of the cir
| cumstances of especial cases or because the
| rule in its operation may possibly affect the
| interests of business, is to endanger the
safety and integrity of our institutions and
make the legislation not what it says, but
! what interested parties wish Ii to mean at
| a particular time and under particular cir
cumstances.
The Supremacy of Law.
"The supremacy of the law is the founda-
| ton rock upon which our institutions rest.
| The law, this court said in United States