The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1906-09-06

done by one person singly would not
be unlawful, because neither oppres-
sive nor dangerous in result. This
Is the basis for all antitrust legisla-
ton.
History Of Government Movement
Against Trusts.
The growth of corporate enterprises
to such size as to absorb particular
industries attracted attention between
1880 and 1890, and q Democratic House
OF Representatives, in the last half of
Mr.. Cleyeland's administration, dir
ected committee to make an investi-
cation into the subject of trusts and
monOpolies in this country. A great
deal of evidence was taken, but the
committee failed to agree upon any
remedy by which the recognized evils
should be suppressed, and simply re-
ferred the matter to the next congress.
then known to be republican. That
republican congress of 1890, in the So
called Sherman Antitrust Act" de-
clared all agreements or combination
In restraint of interstate trade or COM
merce to be illegal, and an offence.
and subject to fine and Imprisonment.
and the remedy to suppress them by
bill and injunction in equity was speci-
fically conferred. BY another section
the establishing of monopolies in any
commodity in interstate trade was de-
nounced as an offence against the
United States, and similar remedies
were provided. For a law which af-
fected such tremendous interests, its
language was not full of useful detail
In the description of the offences which
were denounced. 1t would seem as If
congress itself knew that the evil ex-
sited, but had most indefinite idea
OF how 1t was to be described, and the
matter was apparently turned over to
the courts, as cases arose and de-
cfstons were invoked, to work out the
exact character of the offences de-
nounced and the limitations which
were to be introduced into the statute
In order that the Interpretation of it
might accord with what was practic-
able and reasonable. Construed liter
ally, this statute could be used to
punish combinations of the most USE
full character, like partnerships and
other business arrangements conceded
by all to be legitimate and proper, and
the difficulty in its construction has
been to draw a line, effective to sup
press the real evil aimed at by the
legislature and to furnish a proper
and clear rule for the guidance of
business men, while not interfering
with legitimate combinations which
congress had no purpose to prevent.
1t was not to be expected that such
statute, DEPENDENT as it was upon
judicial Interpretation to make it clear,
could operate effectively at once; and
the slow course of judicial decision
had to be awaited before the general
purpose of the act could be attained.
More than this, it was plain that the
only ground for federal interference
was the right of congress to regulate
interstate commerce, and although
these trusts did a business which was
largely Interstate, 1t was often difficult
In proof to show such a direct relation
between the making of the combina-
ton and interstate trade as to make
clear federal Jurisdiction. And yet the
scope of the evils was national, and
united and effective action by state
legislatures and state executives was
hardly to be expected. After the act
was passed in Mr.. Harrison's admin
fstration, actions were promptly begun
under 1t. The first of these reached
the supreme court in Mr.. Cleveland's
second term, during the incumbency
of Mr.. Olney as Encouragement, and
was decided against the government
1t was the case of the United States
against the E. G. knight company, AMI
involved the question whether the pro-
ceeding by which the control of the