The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1911-05-17

! Whatever as 10 subjects ,mbra a.,1 i:l
interstate trade or commerce, or if
this conclusion were not reached
then the contention would rcqu.r. !,
to De held that if the stat. did u., d.
line the things To which !, related and
excluded resorts to Ile only means ,v
WhcE the acts to which j. relates
could be ascertaino6-th u2hl Of
re"Aph-the enforcement If The stat
ute viii be Impossible bccau-. Of H.
unccrtantty
The merely generic cnumrrati..!
which the statute makes OF the act,
to which it refers and tie absence or
any definition Of restraint Of trade as
used in tie statute leaves room for
but one conclusion. which is that it j.
expressly designed not to undu!y limit
the application cf the act hy precise
definition, but while clearly fixing
Standard-that is, by defining the
uIterior boundaries which could be
transgressed with impunity. to leave
1t to be determined by the light Of
reason, guided by the principles of
law and the duty to apply and enforce
the public policy embodied in the
statute, in every given case. whether
any particular act Of contract was
within the contemplation Of he
statute"
] The chief justice took up the facts
and the applications of the statute T.
them. The court found that the re-
suit Of charging the capital stock #
tie Standard Oil Company # New
Jersey and The acquisition hy that
compan: # ,hc shares # the stock
of the other corporations in exchange
Tor its certificates CAV u the cor
poration an enlarged and more per
feet sway and control over the trade
and commerce in petroleum ard is
product. The effect of this. Chico
Justiie White said. The lower court
held, was to destroy IN, potential IL
Of competition" which otherwise
would have existed 10 such an c,t.rt
as to be a combination or conspiracy
IN restraint Of trade in violation Of
the first section of the act, and a.so
be ans attempt to monopolize, and
monopolization to bring about a per-
ennial violation Of the second section.
I'VE see no cause to doubt the cor
rectness Of these conclusions" said
The chief justice. "considering the
subject from every aspect, that IS,
both in view of the facts as estab-
lished by the court and the necessary
operation and effect of the law as we
have construed it upon the inferences
deducible from the facts"
In scrutinizing the acts and doings
Of the Standard Oil in the past for the
purpose of getting assistance in dis
covering intent and purpose, Chief
Justice White left a cutting remark:
we think no disinterested mind
can survey the period in question
without being irresistibIy driven to the
| conclusion that the very genius for
commercial development and organi-
zation which it would seem was man.
ifested from the beginning soon begot
| the intent and purpose TO exclude
others which was frequently mani
Tested by acts and dealings wholly
inconsistent with the theory that they
were made with the single concep-
ton of advancing the development of
business power by usual methods. but
which, on the contrary, necessarily
involved the intent to drive others
from the field and to exclude them
from their right to trade and thus ac-
compliSh the mastery which was the
end IN view. And, considering the pc
riod from the date Of the trust agree
ment in 1879 and 1888 up to the time
of the expansion Of the New Jersey
corporation, the gradual extension Of
/ the power over the commerce in oil
which ensued; the decision of the su
preme court Of Ohio. the tardiness or
reluctance in conforming to the COM
mands of that decision; the method
first adopted and that which finally
eliminated in the plan of the New
Jersey corporation. all additionally
serve to make manifest the continued
| existence of the intent which we have
previously indicated and which.
among other things. impeIled rhe eX-
! pansion Of the New jersey corpora
! ton"
Finally the chief Justice came to
apply the remedy. He said that ordi-
! nHrilN Mhcrn Ninlatinns nf III. :, ~ ~, ~.