davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Commerce
Court Should
Be Created


court judges OF the United States, to be
known as the United States court of
commerce, which court shall be clothed
with exclusive original jurisdiction over
the following classes OF cases:
l. All cases for the enforcement,
otherwise than by adjudication,
and collection of a forfeiture or
penalty or by infection of criminal
punishment. or an order Of the in
terstate commerce commission
other than for the payment Of
money.
2 All cases brought TO enjoin.
set aside, annul or suspend any or
der or requirement of the inter
state commerce commission.
3. All such cases as under sec
tfon 3 of the act of February I9,
1903. known as the "Elkins act
as are authorized TO be maintained
In circuit court Of the United
States.
T. All such mandamus proceed
ings as, under the provisions OF
section 20 or section % of the in
terstate commerce law, are author
ized TO be maintained in a circuit
court Of the United States.
Reasons specially analogous to those
which induced the congress 10 create
the court OF customs appeals by the
provisions in the tariff act of August
3, 1909, may be urged in support Of
the creation of the commerce court
In order to provide a sufficient num-
Der Of judges to enable this court to
be constituted II Will be necessary TO
authorize the appointment of FIVE addi-
tional circuit judges, who. for the pur-
pose Of appointment. might be distrib-
uted TO those circuits where there is at
the present time the largest volume of
business, such as the second third.
fourth. seventh and eighth circuits
The act should empower the chief
justice at any time when the business
Of the court Of commerce does not re-
ouire the services of all the Judges to
reassign the judges designated to that
court to the circuits 10 which they re-
spectively belong: and it should also
provide for payment to such judges
while sitting by assignment in the
court Of commerce of such additional
amount as is necessary to bring their
annual compensation up TO $4,000 The
regular sessions of such court should
be held AT the capital. but It should be
empowered to hold sessions in different
parts of the United States il found de-
sirable; and its orders and judgments
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Monopoly
and Trade
Restraint

bination of persons. formerly engaged
In strade as partnerships or corpora
tions, or otherwise, of course eliminates
the competition that existed between
them, but the incidental ending of that
sarily direct restraint of trade, un-
less of such an embracing character
that the intention and effort to restrain
trade are apparent from the circum-
be the object of the commission. A
mere incidental restraint of trade and
competition is not within the inhibition
tion or conspiracy or contract is inev-
table and directly substantial re-
straint OF competition. and SO re-
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Economy of
Combination
Good


capital, which. concentrated under one
organiza tion, reduced the cost OF pro-
duction and made its proht thereby ana
DDS akin to duress to stifie competition
with it. a
wish to makes this distinction as
emphatic as possible, because con
ceive that nothing could happen more
destructive to the property OF TINS
country than the loss of that economy
in production which has been and VIII
be effected in all manufacturing lines
by the employment of large capital un-
der one management. ! do not mean
to say that there is not limit be-
yond which the economy by the en-
iargement of plant ceases; and where
this happens and combination con-
tinues beyond this point the very fact
shows intent to monopolize and not to
economize.
binations of capital in this country was
not confined TO the legitimate and
proper object of reducing the cost OF
production On the contrary the MS
tory of most trades will show at times
a feverish desire to unite by purchases
combination or otherwise all the plants
in the country engaged in the manu-
facture of particular kind of goods
The idea was rife that thereby a mo-
nopoly could be effected and 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 combination. Their
projectors found that the union of all
the plants did not prevent competition,
especially where proper economy had
not been pursued in the purchase and
in the conduct of the business after the
aggregation was complete. There was
enough, however, of such successful
combinations to arouse the fears OF
good patriotic men as to the result OF
a continuance of this movement toward
the concentration in the hands of
few of the absolute control OF the
prices of all manufactured products
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
nits Special Message to House Of Representative
CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY PRESIDENT TAFT
FOR GRANT OF FEDERAL CHARTERS

feat les %
| tina am f he ii
d ~ the ~ o. ii proper il II o h
10 w
. b hba n
% p~ ~ % by federal
o be o dr Irregular i
ho y,u
in % is o kemp ~% %erpo anti
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08

The supre m e
i court in several or
Supreme its decisions. has
| declined to read
| Court into the, statutes
- sonable" e ( orr e
DeCfSiOHS 1Het restraint of
trade" on IN
ground that the statute applies to all
restraints and does not intend TO leaNe
to the court the discretion to determine
what is reasonable restraint of trade:
The expression, restraint OF trade.
comes from the common law, ana AT
nants Incidental to the carrying OUT
of a main or principal contract whlcn
were said to be covenants IN paruai
restraint of trade, and were held TO De
enforcea BILE because" reasonably adapt
ed to the performance OF the main or
principal contract. And under the gem
eral language used by the supreme
court in several cases 1T would seem
that even such incidental covenants IN
restraint of interstate trade were Win
in the inhibition of the statute and
must be condemned.
In order to avoid such result.
have thought and said that it might
be well to amend the statute so IS to
exclude such covenants from It's CON
demnation. A close examination OF the
later decisions of the court, however.
shows quite clearly, in cases present.
ing the exact question. that such incl
dental restraints of trade are held not
10 De WITHIN the law ana are eXCluOcU
by the general statement that to. be
within the statute the effect upon
trade, of the restraint, must be direct
and not merely incidental, or indirect
The necessity, therefore, for an amend
ment of the statute so as to exclude
these incidental and beneficial cove
nants in restraint of trade. held in
common law to be reasonable, does not
exist.
In some opinions of the federal
judges there have been intimations
having the effect, if sound. TO wea ken
the force of the statute by including
within it absurdly unimportant COM
binations and arrangements. and sug-
gesting therefore the wisdom of chang
ing it's language by Initiating its ap-
plications to serious combinations with
intent to restrain competition or con-
troll prices.
A reading of the opinions of the SUI
preme 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 statute only to the real evil aimed
at by congress.
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Antitrust
Laws; Federal
Incorporation

transportation. The moving causes
have been several:
First, it has rendered possible great
economy. second by "A union of former
competitors it has reduced the prob
ability of excessive competitions; and.
third, If the combination has been *
tensive enough and certain methods
lin the treatment of competitors and
customers have been adopted Inc COM
Diners have secured a monopoly and
complete control of prices or rates.
A combination successful il; acniev-
ing complete control over a particular
line of manufacture has frequently
been called a trust" / presume that
the derivation of the word is 20 be e&-
planned by the fact that usual method
of carrying out the plan of the combi-
nation has been to put the capital aid
plants of various individuals. firms or
corporations, engaged in the same
business. under the control Of trustees.
The increase in the capital of a
business for the purpose of reducing
the cost of production and taeering
economy in the management, has be-
come as essential in modern progress
as the change from the hand tool to
the machine.
When, therefore. we come to con-
strue the object of congress III edopt-
ing the SO called Sherman antitrust
act in 1890. whereby in the first sec
form of a trust or otherwise, nf con-
spiracy in restraint of Interstate or
foreign trade or commerce. is con-
demned as unlawful and made subject
to indictment and restraint BY injunc-
ton; and whereby. in tho second sec
tion, every monopoly. or attempt TO
monopolize, and every combination or
conspiracy with other. persons 10
monopolize any part of Interstate
trade or commerce, is denounced as
Illegal and made subject To similar
punishment or restraint we must Infer
that the evil aimed at was not the
mere bigness of the enterprise, hat it
was the aggregation of capital ard
plants with the express or implied IN
terest to restrain Interstate or foreign
commerce. or to monopolize it in whole
or m part,
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Cannot Define
Reasonable
Restraint

fOrnlity of decision essential 10 just
Judgment. II is to thrust upon the
courts "A burden that they nave no
precedents to enable them 10 carry anu
10 give them a power approaching the
arbitrary the use Of which might IN
volve our whole judicial system IN DIS
aster.
In considering violations Of the anti
trust law We ought. of course, not 10
forget that the law makes unlaw1ul
methods of carrying on business Wnlcit
before it's passage were regarded as
cess. and that they We're denouhSe"
in this act not because OF their IN
trinsic morality, but because OF the
dangerous results toward which they
tended-the concentration or industrial
power in the hands of the few, leading
10 oppression and injustice
In dealing. therefore, with many 0I
condemned by the statute for the pur-
pose of maintaining a prOntaoie DuSl-
ness we may we'll facilitate change Dy
them in the method of doing business
and ena BILE them to bring II back INTO
the zone of lawfulness without LOSING
to the country the economy OF man
agement by which in our domestic
trade the cost of production has been
materially leSsened, and in competi-
tfon with foreign manufacturers our
foreign trade has been greatly IN
creased.
Through all our consideration of this
grave question. however, We must IN
sist that the suppression of competi-
tion. the controlling of prices and the
Interstate commerce and business are
not only unlawful, but contrary 70 the
public good. and that they must be re-
strained and punished until ended
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08

The object of
the antitrust law
was to 9 suppress
the abuses of busi-
ness of the kind
described.
1t was not to in
terfere Wi I h a
great volume of
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Depression
Attends Trust
Investigation

phases of business combinations and in
reference to various subject matters. 1t
has applied to the union under one con-
troll of two competing interstate rail-
roads, to joint traffic arrangements be-
tween several interstate railroads. TO
private manufacturers engaged in a
press competition in a part of the
country. including dozen states and
to many other combinations Affecting
Interstate trade.
dered more and more certain in it's
meaning by a series of decisions of the
supreme court furnishes a strong rea-
son for leaving the act as il is. to ac-
complish it's useful purpose. even
though, if 1T were being newly enacted.
useful suggestions as to change Of
phrase might be made.
1t is the duty and purpose of the ex-
ecutiYe to direct 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 or
gained for a purpose and are conduct
ing business on a plan. which is in vio-
lation of the antitrust law. The work
is heavy one, but it is not beyond the
power of the department of justice. if
sufficient funds are furnished to carry
on the Investigations and to pay the
counsel engaged in the work.
But such an investigation and possi-
prosperity or destruction affects the
comforts not only of stock holders. but
of millions of wage earners, employees
and associated tradesmen, must neceS-
sarily tend to disturb the confidence of
the business community. to dry up the
new flowing sources of capital from its
places of boarding and produce a halt
in our present prosperity that will
cause suffering and strained circum-
stances among the innocent many for
the faults of the guilty few.
The question which l wish in this
message to bring clearly to the con-
sideration and discussion of congress
is whether. in order to avoid such a
possible business danger. something
can not be done by which these busi-
ness combinations may be offered a
means, without great financial disturb
ance, of changing the character. or
ganization and extent of their business
into one within the lines of the law.
under federal control and supervision.
StafIIke-
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Common Con-
troll of Rail-
roads an Evil

tween naturally competing lines and
avoiding the common control of such
lines by any means whatsoever.
One Of the most potent means of ex-
the holding of stock of one railroad
company by another company owning a
competing line. This condition has
grown UP under express Legislative
power conferred by the laws of many
states, and to attempt now suddenly to
reverse that policy so far as 1t affects
the ownership of stocks heretofore so
acquired would be to inf1ict a grievous
injury, not only upon the corporations
affected; but upon large body OF the
investment hofuing public.
/. however recommend thal the law
shall be amended so as to provide that.
from and after the dates of Its passage
no company subject to the interstate
commerce commission shall directly or
kind in capital stock or purchase or
lease any railroad or any other cor
poration which completes with it re-
specting business to which the inter-
state commerce act applies.
But especially for the protection of
the minority stock holders in securing
TO them the best market for their
stock l recommend that such prohibi-
1T shall not operate TO prevent any
corporation which, at the date of the
passage of such act, shall own not less
than half of the entire issue and out
standing capital stock Of any other
railroad company, from acquiring all
or the remainder of such stocks, or to
prohibit any railroad company which.
at the date of the enactment of the
law. is operating a railroad or any
other corporation under lease, executed
for a term of not less than 25 years,
from acquiring the reversionary own
ership of the demised railroad; hut that
such persons shall not operate to au-
thorize or validate the acquisition
through stock ownership or otherwise
ipf
in violation Of the antitrust or any
other law.
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Rates Should
Be Submitted
to Commission

complaint or of its own motion, to enter
upon an investigation into the reason
ableneSS of such change, and that 1t be
further empowered in its discretion to
postpone the effective date of such pro-
posed increase for a period not exceed
ing so days beyond the date when such
rate would take effect.
If, within this time, 1t shall determine
that such increase Is unreasonable, 1t
may then, by it's order, either forbid the
increase at all or fix the-nsa xfmum be-
yond which it shall not be made. II,
on the other hand. at the expiration OF
this time the commission shall not have
completed its investigation, then the
rate shall take effect precisely as it
would under the existing law, and the
commission may continue its investiga-
tion with such results AS might be
realized under the law as it now stands.
The claim is very earnestly advanced
by some large associations of shippers
that shippers of freight should be en-
powered to direct the route over which
their shipments should pass to desti-
nation, and in this connection 1t has
been urged that the provisions of sec
ton Is of the interstate commerce act,
which now empowers the commission,
after hearing on complaint, 10 estab-
lish through routes and maximum joint
rates to be charged, etc, when no
reasonable or satisfactory through
route shall have been already estab-
lished. be amended SO as to empower
the commission to take such action,
even when one existing reasonable and
satisfactory route already exists, II 1t
be possible TO establish additional
routes.
This seems to me to be a reasonab BILE
provision. / know of no reason why a
shipper should not have the right to
elect between two or more established
through routes to which the initial
carrier may be a party, and to acquire
his shipment to be transported to des-
tination over such route or routes as he
may designate for that purpose. How
ever in the exercise of this right the
shipper should be subject to such rea-
sonable regulations as the interstate
commerce. commission may prescribe.
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Text of the
Presidents
Message

which congress
has 10 regulate commerce between the
states and with foreign countries, ana
said that I would bring this subject
matter 10 your attention later In the
session. Accordingly, beg TO submit
10 you certain recommendation as 10
the amendments to the interstate COM
rnerce law and certain considerations
arising out of the operations Of the
antitrust law. suggesting the Wlsoohi
Of federal Incorporation OF induslfiai
companies. ,-.-..-....
commerce commission OF the year 1908
attention is called 10 the fact that be
tween July j, 1908. and the close OF
that year. is suits were begun 10 SET
aside orders OF the commission tbeslces
one commenced before that date) ana
that few orders Of much consequence
had been permitted 10 go without pro
test. that the questions presented by
these various suits We're Fundamental:
as the cOnstituttonality Of the act itseif
was in issuea and the right OF congress
10 delegate any tribunal authority 10
establish az interstate rate was de-
MED.
But perhaps the most serious practi-
cal question. raised concerned the e&-
tent OF the right Of the courts 10 re-
view the orders OF the commission,
and II was pointed out that. II the con-
tention of the carriers in this latter re-
sDect alone was sustained but llttle
progress had been made in the Hep
burn act toward the eHecIiNe reguia-
rfon OF interstate transportation
charges. In i of the cases referred TO
II was stated, preliminary injunctons
were prayed for. being granted IN SIX
and refused in six.
1T has from the first been well
understood. says the commission.
that the success of the present act
as a regulating measure depended
largely upon the facility with
which temporary in5unctions could
be obtained. If a railroad company,
ny mere allegations in its bill Of
complaint, supported by eX parte
af1davits. can Overturn the result
Of DAYS Of patient investigation, no
verv satisfactory result can be eX-
pected. The railroads lose nothing
by these proceedings. since. il they
fail. they can only be required TO
esta blish the rate and 10 pay the
shippers the difference between the
higher rate collected and the rate
which is finally held TO be reason
able. In point Of fact. they usually
profit, because they can seldom be
required TO return more than
fraction Of the excess charges col
lected."
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Federal Con-
troll of Trusts
Necessary

the states and with foreign nations.
protecting them from undue interfer-
ence by the states and regulating their
activities so as TO prevent the Fecur-
renee, under national auspices. OF those
abuses which have arisen under state
control
such a law should provide for the
issue OF stock OF such corporations 10
an amount equal only TO the cash paid
in on the stock; and IL the stock be
issued for property, then at a fair val
uation, ascertained under approval and
supervision of federal authority after
a full and complete disclosure OF all
the facts pertaining to the value OF
such property and the interest therein
of the persons to whom it is proposed
to issue stock in payment OF such prop
erty only of such corporations TO the
states. WITHIN which it may be situ-
ated. upon other similar property To-
Gated therein. and IT should require
such corporations TO hle 1ull and COM
plete reports OF their operations with
the department. OF commerce and labor
at regular intervals.
Corporations organized under this
act should be prohibited from acquiring
and holding stock in other corpora
tiOns except for special reasons upon
approval BY the proper federal authori-
ties), thus avoiding the creation. un-
der national auspices. of the holding
company, with subordinate corpora
tions In different states. which has been
such an effective agency in the crea-
tion of the great trusts and mOnOpOlieS
If the prohibition of the antitrust
act against combinations in restraint
of trade is TO be effectively enforced
it is essential that the national govern
ment shall provide for the creation
OF national corporations TO carry on a
'NS'tf'1s BUSINESS throughout the
United States.
me so4..l.v.Ing laws of the different
states of the law. with respect to for
eign corporations, make il difficult. III
not impossible. for one corporation TO
comply with their requirements 50 as
to carry on a business in a number of
different states.
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Delay Inter
state Conn
merce Rulings

United States although five other cases
had been argued and submitted TO that
tribunal in October. 1909.
OF course every carrier affected by
an order Of the commission has a con-
stitutiOnal right 10 appeal 20 a federal
court 10 protect il from the enforce
ment OF an order which IL may show
10 be prima fscie conhscatory or un-
justly discriminatory in its effects, and ,
as this application may be made 10 a
court, IN any district of the United
States, not only does ii delay results
IN the enforcement Of the order. but
great uncertainty IS caused by contra
riety Of decision.
The questions presented by these ap-
pilcations ire too often technical in
their character and require knowl-
edge Of the business and the mastery
OF a great volume of conflicting evil
oence which is tedious to examine and
troublesome 70 comprehend
i would not be proper to attempt to
deprive any corporation of the right to
the review by 4 court of any order or
any decree, which. if undisturbed,
would rob il of reasonable return
upon its investment or would subject il
10 burdens which would unjustly dis
crlminate against Il and In favor Of
other carriers similarly situated.
What is. however, Of supreme impor-
tance IS that the decision OF such ques-
tions shall be as speedy s the nature
Of the circumsta noes viii admit and
that a uniformity Of decision be secured
80 IS 10 bring about an effective sys-
tematic and scientific enforcement Of
the commerce law rather than conflict
ing decisions and uncertainty of final
result.
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08

The statute has
been on the statute
books now for two
decades and the
supreme court in
more than a dozen
opinions has con-
strued il in appli-
tfnn 70 x-arfnrta
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08
Efficiency
Would Be
Permitted

abuses under federal protection. it
should be said that the measure con
templated does not repeal the Sherman
antitrust law. and is not to be framed
SO as 10 permit the doing OF the wrongg
The San Francisco call., 1910-01-08

T h e antitrust
statute was passed
in 1890, and prose-
cutionS were soon
begun under il. In
the case of the
United States VS.
Knight, known as
the sugar trust