Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1910-01-13

sources and the extent Of their output
compared with the total output ms
means OF compelling custom and fright
enns OF competition, then they dis
CLOSE purpose to restrain trade and
TO establish a monopoly and Violate the
act. -
economy "ot Only Effect Of sisnsss.
wish to make this distinction as
emphatic as possible, because l con-
Selve that nothing could happen more
destructive to the prosperity Of this
country than the loss Of that great
economy In production which has been
ana VIII be effected In all manufactur-
ing lines by the employment Of large
capital under one management. | do
not mean to say that there IL not q
limit beyond which tho economy of
management by the enlargement Of
plant ceases, and where this happens
ana combination continues beyond this
point the very fact shows intent to
monopolize and not to econOmixe.
The antitrust statute was passed In
IoSO' ana prosecutions were soon be-
gun under It. In the case Of the
United States versus Knight, known as
the sugar trust case" because of the
narrow scope Of tho pleadlngs the
combination sought to be enjoined was
held not to be included within the
prohioItion OF the act, because the
averments did not 60 beyond the mere
acquisition Of manufacturing plants
for the refining Of sugar and did not
include that Of a direct and intended
restraint 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 II gave other COM
panies and combinations seeking 4
similar method Of making profit BY
| establishing an absolute control and
monopoly in a particular line of manu-
facture a sense Of immunity against
prosecutions In the federal jurisdic-
ton. and where that Jurisdiction Is
barred in respect to business which
Is necessarily commensurate with the
boundaries Of the country no state
prosecution Is able to supply the need
Ell machinery for adequate restraint or
punishment
Following the sugar trust decision,
however. there have come along in the
slow but certain course of judicial
disposition cases involving a construc
ton Of the antitrust statute and its
application until now they seem to
embrace every phase of that law
which eau be practicable presented to
the American public and to the gov
eminent for action They show that
the antitrust act has wide scope and
applies to many combinations in actual
and subject to indictment and re.
strnint
All Restraints Forbidden.
The supreme court In several Of its
decisions has declined to read into the
statute the word unreasonable" be-
fore restraint of trade" on the ground
that the statute applies TO all restraints
and does not intend to leave to the
court the discretion to determine what
Is reasonable restraint Of trade.
The expression restraint of trade"
comes from the common law, and at
common law there were certain cove
nants incidental to the carrying out of
n main or principal contract which
were said to he covenants in partia!
restraint Of trade and were held to be
enfOrcible because reasonably" adapt
ed to the performance Of the main or
principal contract. And under the gen
eral language used by the supreme
court in several cases 1t would seem
that even such incidental covenants i'm
restraint Of interstate trade were with.
In the inhibition of the statute and
must be condemned. In order to avoid
such result. have thought and said
that 1t might be- well to amend the
statute so as to exclude such cove
nants frop, its condemnation. A close
examina ton Of the later decisions of
The court. however, shows quite clear.
ly in cases presenting the exact uues-
ton that such incidental restraints of
trade are held not to he within the
law and are excluded by the general
statement that to be within the stat.
ute the effect upon the trade Of the re
straint must be direct and not merely
Incident or indirect. The necessity,
therefore, for an amendment Of the
statute so AZ to exclude these inciden.
tai and beneficial covenants In re-
straint Of trade held ut common law
to be reasonable does not exist
The opinions of the supreme court
exclude from the operation of the act
contracts affecting Interstate trade in
but a small and incidental way and
apply the statute only to the real evil
aimed at by congress.
The statute has been on the statute
book now for two decades, and the
supreme court in more than dozen
opinions has construed It in applica-
ton to various phases of business COM
binations and In reference to various
subjects matter. The value of
statute which Is rendered more and
more certain in its meaning by Sc
ries OF decisions of the supreme court
furnishes a strong reason for leaving
the act as 1t Is to accomplish Its useful
purpose.
1t Is the duty and the purpose of the
executive to direct an investigation by
the department Of justice through the
grand Jury or otherwise into the his
tory, organization and purposes Of all |
the industrial companies with respect
to which there Is any reasonable
ground for suspicion that they have
been organized for a purpose and are
conducting business on plan which |