The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1904-03-15
by which the companies are incorpo
rated was not we'll founded.

by which the companies are incorpo-
rated was not we'll founded.
Justice Harlan said that in this day
there should be no doubt of the power
of congress to control interstate COM
merce, although the means might be
resorted to for that purpose. All
the prior trust cases were in support
of that contention. Whether free and
u~nrestrained combination was wise, he
said, was an economic question with
which the court need not concern It,
self. He asserted the power of con-
sress over interstate commerce to te
as complete as the power OF a state
over domestic commerce. Coming
to the plea of the railroads that the
antitrust laws should be declared I'M
constitutional, he said that the court
could not see it's way to that end.
'If," he went on, ''the Securities
company's contentious are sound, why
may not all the railroads of the United
States enter into a combination and
by the device of a holding corpora
ton control rates throughout the
country in defiance of congress?"
Justice Harlan also discussed the
i predictions of financial disaster from
the enforcement of the antitrust
law, but discouraged them, saying they
were usual under such circumstances
and need not be realized.
Justice Harlan. declared hal the
only object of the merger was to pre-
vent competition and he said that ii
no one else knew this to be the case,
]. Pierpont Morgan, one of the defend
ants knew that to have been the case,
Extracts from Morgan's testimony
were quoted in support of this state
ment.
The decree of the circuit court, he
said, could not have been of smaller
scope and it had in no way exceeded
it's authority. The law must not be
narrowly construed, but reasonably
construed. The defendants could moi
complain of the findings of the circuit
court and Justice Harlan in conclusion
announced the confirmation of the
decision of. the court, saying:
"The judgment of this court is tina
the decree below of the circuit cour
be and hereby is affirmed, with liber
ty to the circuit court to proceed IL
the execution of the decree as tn
circumstances may require"
The decision was %concurred in b.
Justices Brown, Brewer, McKenn'
and Day, while the chief justice AM
Justices White, Packham and Holme
%dissented /.
Justice Harlan was followed by jus
tice Brewer, who while concurring il
the Judgment, did not accept all of tn
language of the opinion.
Dissenting Opinions.
Justice Holmes read the dissen
ing opinion. He construed the ant
trust law as a criminal statute and d.
! clared that there was nothing in it t
indicate that II had been enacte
merely for the control of large col
|, Germs as is generally contended.
Indeed, the law had not been unde
stood as applying to railroads until $
construed by the supreme court. TIL
act, he commended applies only to col
| tracts and combinations in restrail
) ing of trade and makes no referenc
to competition.
: Logically construed, Justice Holme
+ said, today's decision should be fc
. lowed by the criminal prosecution
d the parties at interest in this case.
Speaking of the general unde
i standing that the Sherman law apple
only to large corporations, the justit
e said this impression a breathe
from every pore of the statute, b.
l. that its language did not bear out tt
e conclusion.
He thought this inference due to Il