Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1910-01-12

..plete. There were enough, however, of
such successful combinations Ito arouse
the fears Of good, patriotic men as to the
result Of a continuance of this movement
toward the concentration in the hands of
a few of the absolute control of the
prices of all manufactured products.
Refers to Sugar Trust Case.
The antitrust statute was passed in
1890. and prosecutions were soon begun
under it. In the case Of the United States
vs. Knight known as the sugar trust
case" because Of the narrow scope of
the pleadings, the combination sought to
be enjoined was held not to be included
within the prohibition of the act because
the averments did not go beyond the
mere acquisition of manufacturing plants
for the refining of sugar, and did not in.
clude that of direct and intended re-
straint upon trade and commerce in the
sale .,and-.delivery Of sugar across state
Boundaries and In foreign trade. The
result of the sugar trust case was not
happy, in that it gave other companies
and combinations seeking similar meth
cd of making profit by establishing in
absolute control and monopoly in par
ticular line of manufacture, sense Of
immunity against prosecutions In the
federal jurisdiction, and where that
jurisdiction is barred in respect to a
business which is necessarily commensur-
ate with the boundaries Of the country,
no state prosecution Is able to supply the
needed machinery for adequate restraint
or punishment.
Following the sugar trust decision,
there have come along in the slow but
certain course of judicial disposition
cases involving construction of the an
THRUST statute and it's application, un-
til now they seem to embrace every phase
of that law which can be practically pre-
scented to the American public and to
the government for action. They show
that the antitrust act has a wide scope
and applies to many combinations in
actual operation, rendering them unlaw-
full and subject to indictment and re-
straint.
Amendment Unnecessary.
The supreme court in several of it's
decisions, has declined to read into the
statute the word unreasonable before
RESTRAINT of trade" on the ground that
the statute applies to all restraints and
does not intend to leave the court the
discretion to determine what is a reason
able restraint of trade. The expression
restraint of trade comes from the COM
mon law, and at common law there were
certain covenants incidental to the car
rying out of main or principal con-
tract which were said to be covenants in
partial restraint of trade, and were held
to- be enforcible because reasonably
adapted to the performance of the main
or principal contract, and under the
general contract, and under the general
language used by the supreme court in
several cases, it would seem that even
such incidental covenants in restraint
of interstate trade were within the in
hibition of the statute and must be con-
demned.
In order to avoid such result have
thought and said that it might be we'll
to amend the statute so as to exclude
sucn covenants from it's condemnation. A
close examination of the later decisions
Of the court, however, shows quite clear
ly in cases presenting the exact ques-
ton, that such Incidental restraints of
trade are held not to be within the law
and are excluded by the general state
ment that, to be within the statute, the
effect upon the trade of the restraint
tai or indirect. The necessity, therefore,
for an amendment of the statute so as
to exclude these incidental and bene-
fetal covenants in restraint of trade held
in common law to be reasonable, does not
exist.
In some Of the opinions of the federal
circuit Judges, there have been fntiHa-
tons, having the effect, if sound, to
weaken the force Of the statute by in
Guiding within it absurdly unimportant
combinations and arrangements, and sug-
costing, therefore, the wisdom of chang
ing it's language by limiting it's appli-
cation to serious combinations with in
tent to restrain competition or control
prices. A reading of the opinions of the
supreme court, however, makes the
change unnecessary, for they exclude
from the operation of the act contracts
affecting interstate trade in but a. small
and Incidental way, and apply the stat