Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1910-09-05

Ats' AtA7 bNNAi Btlso1b ny NOuEiG0o MAX
ing easier for the employees who have
been injured through the negligence
of the company or some other EN-
ploye of the company, to recover COM
pensation for their injuries. The old
common law upon this subject was
unjust to the employees and seemed to
have been in the interest of the en-
ployer. Congress has empowered the
interstate commerce commission to
require all interstate railroads to
adopt every reasonable safety appli-
ance in order to reduce the deplor-
able loss of life and limb among rail
way employees engaged in and about
the running of trains.
Finally, bureau of mines has just
been established in order that by in
vestigation and close observation of
the practical working of mines the
best appliances for preventing the
enormous loss of life that occurs from
the explosion of gas and fire in coal
and other mines may be devised and
adopted
This legislation is in the interest
and for the benefit of a class-the
workingmen-but they are so large a
class and their welfare is so import
ant to the public at large, that while
it might be characterized as class leg
islation it is greatly for the public
welfare and cannot be denominated
privileged or Objectionable.
We need and l hope we shall Sc
cure more of such legislation.
But there is kind of legislation to
which l would refer, that does come
under the head of vicious class legis-
lation and l hope I can make the
distinction clear between this and
what | have been describing.
A number of statutes have been
passed in the states against combina-
tions or conspiracies to restrain trade
to suppress competition and there has
been sometimes an attempt to insert
in such statutes a proviso or a sec
tion exempting farmers or other class
es from the operation of the statute
so as to enable the excepted so as to
corner products and raise prices while
no other class in the community can
do so.
The supreme court has held that
such law gives an undue privilege to
particular class in the community,
create an unjust exemption from the
operation of useful law, denies the
equal protection of the laws, violates
the constitution and is invalid.
Again, the federal antitrust law has
been held by the supreme court to
denounce combinations, to obstruct
interstate trade and to prohibit there
fore, illegal boycotts to injure the in
terstate trade of any person. At the
last session of congress, in an appro-
priation bill, some 100000 was appro-
priated for the enforcement of the
antitrust law. To this appropriation
an amendment was proposed provid-
ing that no part of the 100000 should
be used in the prosecution of the
workingman engaged in a boycott in
violation of the statute
That is not the way the amendment
read, but that was in way its nee
essary effect.
A majority of the house after a
very hot discussion, rejected the
amendment on the ground that it was
vicious class legislation. As a matter
of fact the money previously appro-
priated to enforce the antitrust law
had never been used for the prosecu-
tion of workingmen engaged in such
boycott, because there was no occa-
sion for such use and in all probabili-
ty the money now appropriated will
never be used for such a purpose.
But it was the proper view of the
majority, who voted against the
amendment that on principle such a
class exemption or privilege should
not be declared and approved in a
statute. l have not the slightest ex-
pectation that the money will ever be
used for anything but the prosecution
of corporations and business grms en-
gagged in combinations in restraint of
trade; but to tie the hands of the ex-
ecutive against an unlawful combina-
tion existed and thus make any group
or privileged class of law breakers, is
neither justice nor wisdom nor good
craftsmanship.
But it is said that | am not consist
ent because l proposed to the last
congress that interstate railroad com
panies be permitted to make temper
ary arrangements lasting for thirty
days and fixing uniform rates for traf-
fic between the same places and to
this extent be exempted from the op-
GRAFTON of the antitrust law.
1t was said with great plausibility
you are opposed to exempting work
ingmen from the operation of such a
law but you favor the exemption Of
railroads"
The answer is that interstate rail
roads are restricted much more close
ly and are under much more minute
observation by the interstate com
merce law than they can possibly be
under the antitrust law The inter
state commerce law thus makes them
a special class to be treated by them
selves.
The reason for my recommendation
was that the business of railroads and
the fixing of railroad rates cannot