Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1909-01-28
CORPORATIONS ;MUST bow TO
LAWS OF STATE.
Decision of United States Supreme
Court in Famous :lCaSe of the
Wafers-PierCe. Oil Company Up.
Holding Fine of $I,625, 900 Is of
Far Reaching Consequence.

WASHINGTON, d. c., Jan. 26.--I
Lwyers and public men generally
agree that the most staggering blow
yet struck at trusts and combina-
tiOns in restraint of trade was de-
livered by the Supreme Court of the
of the Waters-Pierce Oil company
of Texas, which lost every point on
which it appealed from the decision
of the Texas courts. The company
was ousted from the state of Texas
and fined $1,623,9OO for long-con-
tinued violation of the Texas Anti
Trust law.
This sweeping and epoch-making
decision of the highest tribunal in
the land goes to the very heart of
the question Of state control of
trusts and monopolies, and vindi-
Gates the right and power of State
Legislatures to shape laws as they
may see fit, with the aim of re-
lieving the people of the exactions
of illegal combinations.
In it's decision the Supreme Court
held that under the police powers
of the state the latter could not be
limi+od ~ its choioo If methods for
dealing with the evils of monOpolies
unless it imposed fines that were so
grossly excessive as to constitute
clear violation of the provisions of
the constitution forbidding the talk
ing of property without due pro-
cess of law.
The language of the decision,
which was written and delivered by
Justice Day, seems to squint at the
fine imposed by Judge Lands in the
case of the Standard Oil company Of
Indiana, and from its terms it might
be inferred that If the court had
been considering the question of the
reasonableness of the $29.00Q.000j
fine it would have held it to be ex-
cessive and therefore in violation
of the constitutional inhibition on
taking property without due pro-
cess of law.
The great Importance to this
decision lies in the complete recog-
1ition by tie E.r.ame Court of the
power Of the state to protect their
citizens, not against actual mono
poles and trusts, but against acts
or proceedings that have a tendency
to promote monopolies and throttle
competition by restricting the pro-
ductfon of articles and regulating
their prices. The decision holds that
State Legislatures have right to
penalize acts tending to promote
monopoly and upholds the ruling of
the Texas state court that even
when the monopolistic combination
or agreement in restraint of trade
is made outside the borders of a
state, the state can intervene when
ever any act is performed within
the borders Of the state tending to
carry such agreement.
Thus the contention, which was
set up by the Waters-Pierce Oil
Company, that the State of Texas.
could not Interfere with it's busi-
ness because the latter constituted
Interstate Commerce subject alone to
the Jurisdiction of the federal courts
falls to the ground before the find
ings of the Supreme court.
It is believed here that he de-
cision will go further than any pre-
vious one toward putting an end to
the formation of trusts and will
lave IN l.....o.i,..e tenal lncy to
cause some Of those now in exist
ence to wind up their affairs and
either 60 out of business altogether
or reorganize on a new and safer
basis. It cannot fail to make In
vestors chary for the future of put
ting their money into enterprises
that have any appearance Of mo-
nopoly.