The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-05-17
Governmental Washington Debates Possible Results
 of Famous Decision
TAFT SUBMITS TO
 COURTS DECISION
Most Members of Congress Frankly Express Their Disapproval of Rule of Reason" Fea- ture of the Case


 Washington. May s.-Governmental lative. executive and judicial-gave over the greater part of today to a discussion of the supreme courts dis position of the Standard oil case.
 While there was much qualification in administration circles over the order for the dissolution of the giant cor poration, which had been declared "an unreasonable'' combination and monop- oly in restraint of trade. there unques- tionably was also some misgiving as to the Interpretation of the antitrust law giving the courts the right to de- termine whether or not monopoly was reasonable and declaring a reason able monopoly not to be in contra vention of the statute.
 President Taft, who little more than year ago, in a special message to Congress declared that under su- preme court precedents there could be no such things as reasonable' and unreasonable" restraints of trade. or In other words good trusts" and bad trusts" was said today to have been rather keenly disappointed that the court should have seen fit to reverse itself in this important matter.
 President Taft's message was freely quoted about the capitol today and the seeming similarity of his views as to the scope of the antitrust law to the view expressed by Associate Justice Harlan in his dissenting opinion of yesterday, attracted renewed attention to Justice Harlan's position as out lined In his statement to the court.
 Justice Harlan held that his brother judges had no right to usurp the func- tion of the legislative branch of the government by writing into the statute a differentiation between reasonable" and "unreasonable' restraint of trade. He declared thet Congress had re- sisted all appeals to so amend that act and that there was every reason to be- lieve such an amendment never could be put through the legislative branch.
 Cader tSese circumstances and ir their extremity, great aggfegations oi wealth applied to the court In an eff fort to have 1t construe the law in a way that would be a flat reversal of what 1t had held on two previous oc- casions.
 Harlan Dissents
 Justice Harlan declined to be a party to such reversal and hence his dis senting opinion. He denounced as the most alarming tendency of the day" the tendency to Judicial Legislation. Men of power, he said. always were trying to get the courts to do what Congress would not.
 Tof in, Oa to Congress of January ', 1910. urging d federal incorporation act, declared that to put the word reasonable into the antitrust statute and thus leave it for the courts to say what was a reason able restraint of trade, would be to put into the hands of the courts "a power impossible to exercise on any consistent principle which would insure the uniform ity of decision essential to good judg ment."
 "It is to throw upon the courts" he aded, "a burden that they have no prece- dents to enable them to carry and to give them a power approaching the ar- bitrary, the abuse of which might in volve our judicial system in disaster"
 As to the doctrine of good trusts and bad trusts" which the majority opinion of the court, as expressed by Chief Jus tice White seems to have laid down, Pres 1uenI ldIt III HIS IltSSdSc Wiittcii AAOi ' than year ago said:
 "The public, and especially the busi- ness public, ought to rid themselves of the idea that such distinction is prac- ticable or can be introduced into the statute. Certainly under the present anti trust law no such distinction exists
 Relying upon the former opinions of the supreme court in the so-called trans Missouri and joint traffic cases, the Pres ident said:
 ",rhe supreme court in several of it's decisions has declined to read into the statute the word unreasonable before restraint of trade on the ground that the statute applies to all restraints and does not intend to leave to the court the discretion to determine that which is a reasonable restraint of trade"
 Taft, Defers To Discussion
 The apparent reversal In the Standard oil case of the courts decisions on these former occasions formed the basis of much discussion and speculation which was indulged in here today. Although the Presidents ideas as to the rule of reason'' seem to be divergent from those of the majority and to coincide more closely with the dissenting views of Jus tice Harlan, Mir. Taft was quoted by callers today as saying:
 
 court; I am willing to take my law from it."
 Generally speaking, democratic senators and, representatives today frankly ex- pressed their disappointment as to the '.rule of reason feature of the decision Chairman Adamson of the House com. mttee on interstate and foreign commerce declared the supreme court had no con stitutional power to write the words ..reasona ble" or unreasonable" into tho Sherman antitrust law.
 It was reported tonight that severa democrats are ready to offer amendment: to nullify the courts Interpretation of thu law, but the matter unquestonably vii be carefully considered before any actioi Is taken Some insurgent republican sen ators also were said to have in view amendments to the antitrust law declar ing all monopolies, whether reasonable o unreasonable. to be In restraint of trade and thus take from courts the power o interpretation bestowed by yesterday. decision.
 Representative Mann. republican leader of the House. gave the decision his hearty indorsement He defended the courts ac tion in the use of the word "unreason able" and declared that if such distinc ton had not been made in the opinion tho business world would have been throwr into chaos.
 Chairman Clayton of the House judi ciary committee declared that the ''upex pected narrowing of the statute would , make necessary further legislation by Congress.
 MT. Clayton held to the view, however -----~-~----->---->--->~--
 CONTINUED ON PAGE 1Ol