Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1910-01-13

1 a. contract Is tnoyiSa0iy- rnu -dlreotTv ,
.. 1,,bctantiai eoiatralnt 81 competition. ana
% . restraint Of trade. that The STATUTE
ne second condition Of the act is sup.
plen,ent Of the nrst, A direct restraint
Il trade such 90 10 condemned In thu
arnt section, n successful and used "a
suppress competition, 10 one OF the com.
monest methods Of securing Q trade
monopoly, condemned In the second
section.
II 10 possible for the owners OF bust
ness OF manufacturing and selling useful
articles OF merchandise so to conduct
their business az not to violate the I'm
hibltionS OF the antitrust law and yet
to secure to themselves the benefit OF the
economies Of management and Of produc-
ton due to the concentration under one
control OF large capital and many plants.
II they use no other inducement than
the constant low price OF their product
and its good quality to attract custom.
and their business Ii profitable one,
they violate no law. II their actual
competitors are small In comparison with
the total capital invested, the prospect
| of new investments Of capital by others
| ia such profitable business Is sufficient
| ~ near and potential to restrain them In
| the prices at which they sell their prod
uct But II they attempt by a use OF their
preponderating capital, and by a sale of
their goods temporarily at unduly low
prices, to drive out OF business their
competitors, or II they attempt. by ex-
elusive contracts with their patrons and
threats Of non-dealing, except upon such
contracts or by other methods OF sim
liar character, to use the largeness OF
their resources and the extent Of their
output compared with the total output
as a means of compelling custom and
frightening off competitions then they
disclose a purpose to restrain trade and
to establish monopoly, and violate the
act
Law to Suppress Abuses,
NM,
o Vpyoet, VI the AMI Trust law was
~ suppless tle ABUSES Oh business OF tne
A iais usscrlpeu' was not 70 ihteriere
WIN slea. volume OF capitai winch
Sohcshtrateo unuer one orgahzauon, re-
~ uuoeu u'e eos. " p.ouuIuon anu naoe
70 prom 'nerepy anu took no aovantage
u ~ ~ size, uy metnoos AKIN 70 ouress' 10
suns cvAnpetltlCh WIN IT.
1871 WSn " naMe 'iiis uls.lncgon as em-
phauc az possible because CONCEIVE
tnat nothing could happen more destruc-
i've 10 the prosperity OF this country than
tne loss OF tnat great economy " produc-
ton which mas been and VIII be erect
60 In all manufacturing lines by the en-
ployment OF large capital under one man
agement do not mean to say that
there II not limit beyond which the
economy Of management by the enlarge
%Snnana and contnes Ss
yond this point, the very fact shows In
tent to monopolize and not to economize.
The original purpose Of many combina-
tons Of capital in this country was not
confined to the legitimate and proper OBJ
ject Of reducing the cost Of production.
on the contrary, the history of most
trades will show ct times a feverish de-
sire to unite by purchase, combination,
or otherwise, all the plants In the coun-
try engaged in the manufacture Of par
ticular line Of goods. The idea was rife
that thereby q monopoly could be ef.
fected and a control Of prices brought
about which would inure to the profit OF
those engaged in the combination. The
path Of commerce is strewn with failures
of such combinations, Their projectors
found that the union OF all plants did NOT
prevent competition, especially wnere
proper economy had not been pursued In
Luo PoASAeoo OhO ass sAAS =
business after the aggregation was COM
plete. There were enough, however, OF
such successful combinations to arouse
the fears Of good, patriotic men as 10 the
result Of continuance OF TINS movement
toward the concentration IN the nanos Of
q few Of the ap9oluIo conrOs ~ '"s
prices Of all manufactured products'
p.s... e. a,,nar Trust Case,
1888 a.
The antitrust statute was paSseu
1880, and prosecutions were soon Desun
under It. In the case OF the United STATES
vs.. knight, known as the sugar trust
case" because Of the narrow scope OF
he pleadings, the combination sought 70
b en1oined Was held not to be included
within the prohibition OF the act because
he aveFments did not 90 beyond the
mere acquisition Of manufacturing plants
,or the refining Of sugar, and did not In
,lude that OF direct ano lntenuSu III
~. y, siI. SsS,,sry ~ s,,gar across atatS
- 800 arS ~ forsj~r trade. The
.... - 49,. .,,,-a- tr,st naea 1,,sa moi
1917. th.t q ave other camnanIes
s.,nrs .es,ng similar nneth-
- - 1870 ,rosIs hS aStahIIahine IN
4 1850. - oortsoi ana u,oronoIv in a mar.
,....Is. i,,ss - rcsr,eact,,re a eenae az :
.ssn...,s.. .a,rst rrcaacutinrs IN the I
!. 49,, ss,,.tsS.ot,nr ana yrbara mat
..ssnss..,ss - 49, IN resnect to : I
..s..a. s.,,,ah "a ,,aco.uor,lv cornnahaur.
' y. .s.s,. az ho,,rSo-1e- ~ Az conntrv {
" ~. ~ - ahIo "a sunniv ne
y s.s ~ plysSs ~. sSaore,s ractrajn,
\ ,a H' AO '4N~'' Z
: r.p,,n...i,.s ~ .,,~s. ,.,,.t dacIs,or 9
H ~ WIS 49,, a., ~. .IoS~ hi; I
IVY hefS SoAiN - 80 ssO-..s 4