The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-08-21
WARNING GIVEN
BY La TOILETTE
Tells Senator'S Who Ignore Him
of Their Coming
Defeat.
WOULD AMEND TRUST LAW
Introduces Bill to Make Certain
What Is Reasonable
Restraint"
WOULD AMEND TRUST LAW

FeiuSeo TO listen 10 his speeches
might. after the electionA be per-
manently detained from the Senate.
He was making al address on trust
control-speaking to a bill he had
introduced in tho morning for tho
purpose Of defining the extent to
which reasonable" restraint shall be
permitted under the Sherman law.
When his audience was reduced to
eleven statesmen he stopped and look
ed around with a smile.
IT will not delay proceedings by
suggesting the absence Of a quorum. "
he said. but 1 will simply remind
this chamber that FIVE years in q
speech on the necessity of rate regu-
lation I warned Senators who refused
to occupy their seats while I held
the food that they might later be
forced to vacate their seats. My re-
marks excited amusement then, as
they seem to now but about thirty
Senators. who might have heard me
then, have now permanently left this
body. Perhaps my little efforts had
something to do with It,. and I will
only suggest that something Of the
same sort may happen to those wkose
seats are vacant around me. But
shall soon conclude my remarks. and
Senator's may then return to the
chamber"
The bill. which Mr.. La Toilette Will
press later. specifies that whenever q
combination, trust, or conspiracy Is
shown to exist the burden of proof
that the combination is mot unreason-
able shall rest upon 'the party who
contends that the restraint is rea-
, sonable." 1t defines the specific meth
DDS of restraining trade, under which
1t shall be held that such restraint
Is unreasonable. These include COM
binations to prevent the purchase OF
articles from other corporations, dis
elimination by a trust against certain
buyers, and the granting OF special
prices; attempts to prevent competi-
ton by unfair or oppressive meth
DDS OF competition"
Mr.. La Toilette declared that the in
corporation of the word reasonable"
into the Sherman act came as a ais
tinct shock.
THE Supreme Court has amended
the Sherman act" he said. at mat
tiers not that Congress has refused for
years to change this law, the court
has done it and made it apply TO 'un-
reasonable restraint OF trade. 1t IS a
clear %usurpation OF power by tho Su-
preme Court"
He said the court had yielded to
the opportunities OF those VINO want
ed the act amended, and had changed
the law after Congress had refused TO
do so.
The change was made after the new
members had been put on the Supreme
| Court, and all the new members of the
court fell on that side of the line" said
Senator Owen, of Oklahoma
Mr.. La Toilette agreed with MI.
owen.
while this was clearly a ~usurpation
Of Legislative power, the amendment
stands and is now the law of the land"
he went on. CAS- the law now stand
as amended the Supreme Court may en-
ercise the power over the business In
terests of the country more despoli-
cally than any of the monarchs of the
civilized world over their subjects. To
one corporation II may give its APP
prevail and to another It's condemnation
without any rule OF law TO guido 1t in
either case.
while opposing tho amendment by
Congress for the very good fea sun stat
ed by him, the President now approves
of the same amendment when made by
the Supreme Court. In his speech 1T
New Haven on June 81. he said. speak
ing of the Standard Oil and tobacco
trust decisions:
~ believe those decisions have done
and will continue to do great good TO
all the business of the country and
that they have laid down a line of dis
tinction which 1t is not difficult for
honest and intelligent business men
to follow. 1t becomes largely a ques.
tion of fact and u question OF con-
science with the business community
that they can We'll follow and make
the standard OF their future action
The President gives no reason for
the complete reversal OF his view upon
that question, but that is not mpor-
tant. / have quoted him only because
In his message 20 Congress he correctly
set forih the arbitrary and dangerous
power which would be conferred upon
the Supreme Court by the amendment.
AMI in his New Haven speech he cor
rectly set forth the conditions in which
the business interests OF the country
md themselves.
"Whatever MAY be said for or againsr
the proposition that every restraint OF
trade should be unlawful, IL is mani
festlr for the Legislative branch of The
government to declare what methods
and practices shall be forbidden. Thrs
Is purely "A matter of legislation. and
the rules of conduct should he laid
down by Congress. and not left to the
power of the supreme Court to Civ.
or withhold its approval to a corpora-
tion. according 10 its arbitrary VIII.
"the Bill which 1 have presented "a
the senate To-Day to further protect
trade and agains, unlawful
restraints INK monopolieS is strictly q
supplement and not an amendment "a
the sherman antitrust law. II docs
not propose any alteration OF the sub.
~stantive provisions of the existing law
as recently interpreted By the Supreme
court IN the standard Oil ana tobacco
eases' II does no: change n single
word Of the eight sections OF which the
sherman antitrust law is COMPOSED
II does modify the rule Of reasonable
ness enunciated by the court. hui l.,
makes that rule more certain and cas-.
ier OF application 1, provides also ef.
.vs've means Tor securing compensa-
ton or other relief for those wbn 49,
neen injured by combinations or CON.
sp'rac!es which have been Judiciary
neeIared Illegal, and it otherwise great
" facilitates the enforcement NJ ~.