Evening star., 1909-09-13
WANTS TO ExPOUND THEORY
W. L. ROYAL PREPARES BRIEF
FOR THE SUPREME COURT.
Wishes to Show That the Sherman
Antitrust Law Is Based on
Misconception Of Rights.
Special Dispatch to The Star.

Special Dispatch to The Star.
RICHMOND. Va, September 13.-Wil-
liam L. Royal Of this city has prepared
a brief and will ask the Supreme Court
Of the United States at the October term
to permit him to appear as an amicus
curiae In the suit brought. by the gov
ernment against the American Tobacco
Company. Mr.. Royal has for years been
engaged in study of the trust question,
and in the last twenty years he has ap-
peared in the court of last resort in
some thirty cases, many of them being
leading cases in the law reports.
Mr.. Royal takes the ground that the
Sherman law is wholly and clearly un-
constitutional; that the whole theory Of
the Sherman antitrust law is wrong.
and contends that his solution Of the
matter Is the correct principle. 1t Is to
expound this latter that he seeks to
have the court to allow him to appear
and argue the matter amicus curiae
when the case is to be taken up in re-
view. In the very outset Mr. Royal as
sures the court that his record Is a suf-
fcient guarantee that he will not abuse
the privilege OF the court
Intent Deciding Factor
He contends that the whole Split OF
is the intention of the trust to destroy
competition by combining to undersell or
to take away the trade or business of a
rival by selling goods at lower price
than allows a profit in order to take
away the business and trade of rival
concern, then it is liable for injury and
action at law. He holds that a man or
any number of men can agree to COM
bine and to extend their business in
every way, but that In doing this the
laws of trade must be observed and the
rights of the individual safeguarded In
every way as the rights of the parties
to the combination. On this point, Mr..
Royal says:
Many may do together and Jointly
whatever one may do lawfully alone.
1t is settled that citizens have the right
to make any innocuous contracts. and
this Is one of the liberties secured to the
citizen by the Constitution. The right
to compete, then, to the destruction of
liberty secured by the Constitution. But
there is no right to take an unfair ad-
vantage. The injury done by the trusts
is In giving away their goods or in
selling them below cost for the purpose
of destroying a rival. There is a natural
right to destroy him by fair competition,
but no right to destroy him by giving
away goods for the purpose of destroying
him.
Late E. J. Phelps Accused.
The late E. ]. Phelps, who was one of
counsel In the joint traffic case, pirated
a pamphlet, says Mr.. Royal, which he
(RoyalD published in 1897. in which
Mr. Royal set up these views, and they
were presented by Phelps as his own
views and when the court came to
TIC
up it's previous views in the trans
Missouri case and in effect conceded
the force of his (Royalrs) argument as
who gave Royal no credit for origi-
mating the ideas.
For practically dealing with the
case" says Mr.. Royal, I'VE must aban-
don the whole scheme of the Sherman
law That Is founded on a total mis-
conception Of the whole subject That
law is based upon the idea that it will
control the trusts by abridging the
rights of the men to combine their
resources and assets. This would end
all cooperative business and send us
back to barbarism."
Mr.. Royal is very much in earnest in
his determination to seek permission OF
the court to appear in this matter He
has printed the brief and it has been
sent to many of the leading law jour
mails of the country as well as to some
of the foremost lawyers. and his scheme
has been received with the greatest
consideration. The law journals speak
of 1t In most complimentary way.
while some of the lawyers-and among
them are counsel for great corpora
tions-take the view that Mr.. Royal
has solved the trust problem and he
matter of dealing with them so as to
protect the weaker individuals and at
the same time to promote business de-
yelopment