The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-03-18

70
Washington, March 14.-In the Unit
ed States Supreme. court today an opin-
ion was delivered in the merger case
OF the Northern Securities Company VS..
the United States. in favor OF the Gov
ernment's contention that the merger
was illegal. The opinion of the court
was handed down by Justice Harlan
and 1t upheld the decree OF the Circuit
court for the District of Minnesota in
every particular. Four of the justices
dissented from the five constituting the
majority. The division in the court
was due to d difference of opinion as
to the right Of federal control of state
corporations. The majority opinion
proceeded on the theory that Congress
has a right, under the constitution. to
control Interstate commerce.. no mat
ter by whom conducted. while the mi
nority or dissenting opinion was based
on the theory that In the present case
the effort is to circulate the ownership
OF railroad stocks by state corpora
lions and that such ownership is not in
terstate t~raffics.
Great Interest III thu Decision.
An effort was made by the court to
prevent knowledge of the fact that the
opinion was to be renewed today from
getting to the public. but nevertheless
it Was quite generally understood
among newspaper men. attorneys and
others for an hour or so before the
converting OF tie court today that the
decision would be announced. When
---A
filed into the hambe at noon they
were met by an expectart crowd, which
filled every seat both inside and out
side the bar. Seated among the at
torneys were Attorney General Knox
n Secretary Taft, and an unusual
Eumber Of Senators and members OF
House of Representatives. There was
no surprise manifested when. promptly
on the assembling of the court, Justice
Harlan began the delivery of the opln-
ION The fact hat he had been select
ed for the preparation of the document,
at once led most people to conclude
that the decision would uphold the
Sherman ANTITRUST law, and sustain
the contentious OF the government.
The justice read his opinion from a
printed copy. which covered thirty
pages, and consumed about an hour
n a quarter in its delivery.
The Court Divided.
Very soon after Justice Harlan had
concluded his presentation of the case.
it became evident that the court had
divided on the questions at issue, and
as other o%pionions were announced 1T
developed that there not only had been
a very close shave for the government,
but that one of the members OF the
court who cast his vote with the ma
jority entertained opinions of his own.
which fact rendered the division all the
more marked and interesting. This
was Justice Brewer. who while he con-
CURED in the result, announced in an
independent opinion Of his own that he
keld the view that previous antitrust
decisions had been more sweeping than
was justified
The Dissenting Justices.
Four OF the nine justices dissented
Fuller and Justices White. Peckham
and Holmes. Dissenting opinions were
delivered by Justices White and
Holmes The opinions OF Justices Har-
land and White were long, while those
OF Justices Brewer and Holmes were
comparatively brief. All told. the court
consumed two hours and three-quart-
ers in disposing of the case. The fact
was noted by several persons that the
argument in the case was begun De-
cembeE 14th, just three months previous
to the decision. For so important q
case HIS Is CCIlSIuSfSu q NCLg UIACA III
terim between the arguments and the
decision.
The case decided today was brought
by the United States against the North
ern Securities Company. a corporation
of New Jersey; the Great Northern
Railway Company. a corporation OF
Minnesota; the Northern Pacific Rail-
way Company, a corporation of Wis
consin; James J.. Hill a citizen of Min
nesota; and William p. Clough, D.
Willis James, John S. Kennedy, J.
Pierpont Norgan. Robert Bacon,
George F. Baker and Daniel Lamont,
citizens OF New York.
Its general object was to enforce. as
against the defendant. the provisions
of the statute of July End 1890, COM
monty known as the antitrust act.
and entitled IAN act to protect trade
and against unlawful re-
straint and monopolies."
Decision OF the Court.
Justice Harlan practically indicated
the decision of the court in the first
sentence of the opinion proper In that
sentence hi aid I'm our Judgment
the evidence fully sustains the material
allegations Of the bill and shows q vio-
lation of the Act of Congress. in SO far
, as it declares illegal every combination
or conspiracy in restraint OF commerce
among the several states and with for