The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1911-12-08

among the people Of the United
States"
Commons stock Ownership.
Il has been assumed that the pres.
emit pro-rata and common ownership
in all these companies BY former
stockholders Of the trust would insure
10 continuance Of the same old single
control Of all the companies into
which the trust has by decree been
disintegrated. This is erroneous and
10 based upon the assumed inefncacy
and innocuousness of judicial injunc-
lions. The companies are enjoined
from cooperation or combination;
they have different managers. direc-
tors. purchasing and sales agents. II
all or any Of the numerous stockhold.
ers, reaching into the thousands. at
tempt to secure concerted action OF
the companies with view to the con-
troll of the market. their number is so
large that such an attempt could not
we'll be concealed and its prime NOV.
ers and all its participants would be
at once subject to contempt proceed
ings and imprisonment Of summary
character. The immediate result OF
the present situation will necessarily
be activity by all the companies un'
der different managers. and then com
petition must follow, or there will
be activity by one company and stag.
nation by another. Only short time
will inevitably lead to change in
ownership Of the stock, as all oppor.
tunity for continued cooperation must
disappear. Those critics who speak
Of this disintegration in the trust as
a mere change of garments have not
given consideration to the inevitable
working Of the decree and understand
little the personal danger Of attempt
ing to evade or set at naught the sol
ject Is made plain by the decree and
whose inhibitions are set forth with a
detail and comprehensiveness unex'
ampled in the history Of equity juris
prudence.
The effect Of these two decisions has
led to DEGREES dissolving the combina
ton of manufacturers of electric lamps
southern wholesale grocers' associa
ton. an interlocutory decree against
the powder trust with directions by
the circuit court compelling dissolu
ton, and other combinations Of sim
l h3ct0 k}ot mi
the department of justice looking to 8
disintegration by decree and reorgan
ization in accordance with law. II
seems possible to bring about these re
organizations without general business
disturbance.
Movement for Repeal of the Antitrust
Law.
But now that the antitrust act Is
seen to be effective for the accomplish
ment of the purpose of its enactment
we are met by a cry from many differ
ent quarters for its repeal 1t is sale
to be obstructive of business progress
to be an attempt to restore old-fash
toned methods of destructive competi
ton between small units, and to make
impossible those useful combination!
of capital and the reduction of the cos
of production that are essential to con
tinued prosperity and normal growth.
In the recent decisions the Supreme
court makes clear that there is moth
ing in the statute which condemn:
combinations of capital or mere big
ness Of plant organized to secure
economy in production and reduc
ton of it's COST 1t is only when the
purpose or necessary effect of the or
combination or the aggregation of i'm
mense size are the sitting of competi
ton, actual and potential, and the en-
HANGING of prices and establishing {
monopoly, that the statute is violated
Mere size Is no sin against the law
The merging of two or more business
plants necessarily eliminates competi
ton between the units thus combined
but this elimination is in contraventior
of the statute only when the combina
ton is made for purpose of ending this
particular competition in order to Sc
cure control of, and enhance, prices
and create a monopoly.
Lack Of Definiteness In the Statute.
The complaint is made of the statute
that it is not sufficiently definite IL
it's description of that which is forbid
den, to enable business men to avoi6
its violation. The suggestion is, thai
we may have a combination of two
corporations, which may run on fol
years. and that subsequently the attor
ney general may conclude that it was
violation Of the statute, and tina,
which was supposed by the combiners
to be innocent then turns out to be 8
combination in violation of the stat
ute. The answer to this Hypothetical
case is that when men attempt tt
amass stupendous capital as will en-
able them to suppress competition
control prices and establish monop
oily they know the purpose of thei,
acts. Men do not do such a thina