The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1905-07-20

be typical monopoly, and when the
supreme court decided in its favor in
what was accepted as test case the
general public lost confidence in the
law to such an extent as to doubt
il it were SO drawn as not to invite
evasion.
In this case, however, Mr.. Judson's
record shows that the case was SO
presented as not to bring the issues
of the law itself to test. Contracts
for the manufacture OF refined sugar
were attacked as illegal on the ground
that they were intended to monopolize
the manufacture of, rather than in
terstate commerce IN, that article.
The court decided that "the monopoly
and restraint of trade denounced by
the act were Of interstate trade and
commerce" It ruled that "manufac-
ture is not commerce" and that sale
after manufacture is not Of itself in
terstate commerce within the mean
ing Of the act.
In stead of multiplying the supposed
intention Of the law as was then in
ferred, this decision merely made it
clear In a single case, that in that
case evidence had not been presented
alleging or showing violation Of the
real purpose Of the law.
What Courts Have Decided
In the Addystone pipe case, the SUI
preme court affirmed the judgment OF
the circuit court Of appeals, declaring
unlawful combination OF pipe manu-
facturers intended to abolish cOmpe-
tition and increase prices. In this
case the court declared that If the
combination attempted monopoly I'M
any commodity in interstate COM
merce it was not necessary that it
should succeed in making the mo-
nopoly complete in order to be pun
ishable under the law.
In the California tile trust case the
court ruled that although the sales of
tile by this company were within the
single state of California, its agree
ment with companies outside the
state for the control of interstate
trade in tiles made the sales in the
state of California an inseparable
part of a transaction prohibited by
the law.
Meat Trust Case
On January 80, this year, the su
preme court affirmed the judgment
granting an Injunction in the Swift
Chicago Meat Trust case In this
case the court said that 'the allega-
tions of the bill Of an unlawful COM
bination to the effect that the pur-
chasing agents were required to re-
frain from bidding against each other,
and in bidding up at times SO as to
induce large shipments and in agree
ing upon the prices to be adopted
and upon restrictions Upon the guam
titles Of meats to be shipped and the
making of agreements between trans
portation companies for rebates and
discriminating rates, we're sufficient
to show violation of the law"
Significance Of Debs Case
/ In the Debs case, the circuit court
held that the law forbids combinations
not only in trusts but in any form
whatever If they operate in restraint
of interstate trade. The combination
in this case was not Incorporated at
ali. The Judgment would have APP
piled equally against the person in
volved, however, had he and all con-
cerned with him in restraining inter-
state trade been united as stockhold-
ers in single corporation. The SUI
preme court in affirming the Judgment
acted on 'the broader ground of the
general power of the federal govern
ment in respect to interstate COM
merce," but said that this was mot
because it differed from the circuit
court in it's construction of the act