The San Francisco call., 1904-03-16
THE MERGER DECISION.


order of the President under the antitrust law.
This act of the President brought upon him the enduring
wrath of combined capital and started that campaign
which it hoped would defeat him for the nomination
The organs have found echo faction OF
the Democracy. The New York Sun shouts that Roose
welt is unsafe and the echo unsafe comes back from
Olney Gorman Hearst and Bryan. AS the Supreme
Court has indorsed the position of the President,
pears that the and their echoes think it unsafe
enforce the law.
The courts decision is the most important nterpreta-
tion of the antitrust law and of the OF the FEEDER
al Government between the States that
has been delivered 1t declares that the act is not linn
tied merely unreasonable restraint of trade, but di
rected against all restraint reasonable unreasonable
This that the enoinable is the power to
strain trade, whether it is used
1t will be remembered that J. J. Hill of the Great
Northern, who, next to J. Pierpont Morgan, was the
greatest factor in the said that he would to
that rates resulted from merging the
Great Northern and the Northern Pacific. That declara
tion incautous admission that combining the two
roads, which and the territory
ried with it the power put up rates. because it de-
stroyed competition Mr. Hill has very expert legal ad-
visers and doubt they advised him that action
could lie only against act, and that long as
rates not raised the could not be impeached
The decides that unrestraned trade the right of
the people and that the power restrain it. though
in present is dangerous that the may de
stroy it. and that action lies without waiting for
act.
The of the by Mr.. Justice Harlan is
clear that the lay reader decides without read
ing forward the conclusions of law. Going back the
courts decision the interstate commerce act the
Justice says Congress has the power to establish rules
by which interstate and international shall be
governed and by the antitrust has prescribed the
rule of free competition among those engaged in such
Tba ~ =
and agreement whose direct effect
the play of competition restrains instead
OF promotes trade and commerce"
The discussion OF the points presented by the trust
attorneys very interesting, for involves the old
of State rights and the efficacy Of State corporations
The arguments for the merger made all the points that
have become familiar through publication in the New
York Sun and the other newspapers owned by the
We do not the owned" in usually offensive
implying false pretenses and private subsidies
The trust publications the property of the trusts
and used by them get their side before the public
which is perfectly legitimate
AS has been insisted in these newspapers, and
repeated in the arguments, that ruin would follow such
application of the power of Congress the decision de-
cares may be made, Justice Harlan says; at is the
history of monopolies this country and England that
predictions of ruin habuay made by them when it
IS attempted by legislation restrain their operations
and protect the public against their exacons In this
former cases. they seek shelter behind the reserved
rights of the States and the constitutional guaranty
liberty of contract But this has heretofore ad
judged that the act of Congress did touch the rights
OF States and that liberty of did involve the
right to deprive the people of free competition trade
and But if the shared the gloomy
forebodings in which the defendants indulge could not
refuse TO respect the action of the legislative branch OF
the Government if what has done is within the limits
of its constitutional power"
+,a
antitrust and interstate laws the courts must
to the people they have their the election OF
a Congress that will repeal the laws
While would be justified in ascribing conscious
motives any member of the court it is not without
significance that the three Democratic members Chief
Justice Fuller and Justices White Peckham dissent
from the majority opinion and justify contentious OF
Messrs Hill and Morgan that the merger is merely ar
exercise OF property and personal freedom
This partisan alignment of the will have its ef
feet politics The capital which seeks profit and ad
vantage in enormous combination will naturally seek
to elect Democratic President order to be ready fo
the next two vacancies the bench The dissenting
opinions show that there is such thing as partisan
view of the law based upon party methods of construne
the constitution. The Democratic view uttered bv the
three Democrats in the court against the power o.
opinion enforces against the merger
This is the background the antics of the remarkable
Mr. William Randolph Hearst who informs the countr,
that he in effect the court below and has been affirmed