Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1911-05-31
RULE Of REASON No
NEW FEATURE IN
SUPREME COURT
ADMINISTRATION. FINDS
lFDECIDEDLY ACCEPTABLE LE
Former Opinion Concurred In
: By Justice Harlan Quoted to
Show It Is Proper Exercise Of
Judicial Function.
rBy Morning Journal Special Leased wireI

Washington, May 30.-'That the
government means TO formulate its
antitrust policies in accord with the
rule of reason" as laid down by the
supreme court in the Standard OIL and
tobacco trust decisions, notwithstand-
ing the vigorous dissents of Assocl-
ate Justice Harlan and the many bills
introduced in the senate to amend the
Sherman antitrust law, was made
evident today.
Administration officials after
days consideration and study Of the
tobacco decision and q thorough COM
parison with the Standard Oil decision
were agreed that "the rule of reason"
is no new feature of the supreme
courts Interpretation of law. and one
member of the cabinet. whose views
have always been regarded as reflect
ing those of the administration made
a comprehensive statement to that
effect. q
The statement was attributed to IAN
official close to the administration.
II follows in part:
Justice Harlan in his dissenting
opinion in the tobacco case, objects
vigorously to the application in the
construction of the act of congress of
the rule of reason. to which atten-
ton was called by the chief justice
In his opinion in the Standard OH
case. Justice Harlan says to insert
by construction the. sword 'unreason-
able or undue inss1he Sherman act
is judicial ltwslation.
Congress, The says has in language
so clear and simple that there is no
room whatever for construction sign-
fed its purpose to forbid every re-
straint of trade in whatever form, to
whatever extent, whereas the court
under the chief Justices opinion in
serts in the law words which make
congress say that it means only to
prohibit undue restrain of trade.
This he objects to as amounting to
a reading into the act by judicial leg
islation of an exception not placed
there by the law-making branch Of
the government and this, he contends,
the court cannot and ought not to do.
But Justice Harlan has not already
regarded the judicial function as ex-
cluding the right 60 intUipret statutes
in the light Of reason ana to refuse a
literal application to the words of the
act where that would involve mani
fest wrong In the case of Church OF
the Holy Trinity against United States,
the court had under consideration the
act of congress known as the Allen
Immigration act, passed February rs,
1885.
The Church Of the Holy Trinity in
New ork had made a contract with
Rev. II. Walpole Warren, an alien, re-
siding in England to remove to New
York and enter into its service as its
rector and pastor for compensation
to be paid him. and because of that
1910, ,,,,r,h tha Irni1aa
ss,ata., s - ~ ,.oo,'aa ~, ,,ano,tv nrescrih-
'os"sos ~ e " ,iNio,,n 'ae ,his az, Instic,
prln,a ~ ,va |" 80 ,t,n onininn of tbe court
d, ..,,,ia,. =, ~. o.ha,. iusticas incma
H., tnst,ca Harlan concurred Ha
,s;,ea '.e y. annaad;na .that tho az.
.hs ~ ,.etin,, =, ,,,i,hin tha lat
vi '"o ~ pa,,a., snu H., ralatinn of
,tos ~ ~, ~ i,iS oh,,ro,, ;s one Of service
~ -, ~ - 80 ~, ~ ,he nno sida win
"ou on,,nansat;on no, 81, tha other,
III s,,rthar aotaS tbat certain spe.
o,e;a o1oaotiors wade In The act in
IT,, ',o,.,-,,,,,a zero NOT Included
mnlen .iei sg'nen 49, W. .,at o,,s,.,, s,th ar
st st,o,is ."uau ~ 's ana sarvice was intend
n,'u oi 49,, "a a. ~, ,ha .,a,pte Vet
Gu W pe eaH,eu S.,, ~ ~ that II u,as eaid
uoe"i.aistaos ny, ms, az n,,Ja NOT think that
tia. .na' soa ~ aanorncn with
e,sso i.''e .'.soao,,on Iita tbo am
psna.. in ae A ~hristia, minister
Piosii,eil' "a ,.r,,,I,ar r,,Ie, said Justice
~ - ~ = th,ra NAV he within
p,ewel, 'na' ,ha s,atuta and vet not
vi. ie'.uI ,o,n,a VI NY hacause not within
i,a ',i a,'ir,t .''e ~ ,vitbin The intention Of
a., , -, r,,is Ia, haan often as
sar,nI s n,s ~, ranorts arc full of cas-
se' ~ ,,,' ai.u wy ~. panniicat,on
% .,,us luz a..is ~ ~ ss,,rstitrtion of the
,, lnls - ~, 'he ' that ~ the leg-
VIII Vi ,iie iuuse 81 Ids ~ gar-
lsiator, ior lrequens,s "U,' ~ statnte.
eial meaning are useo ,rn,,,ae -, an ACT
words broad enough 10 lne,, .,aar.,i TO-, Of
IN question: ana yet coi''i"e' Wv ~ air-
me Whoie leslslallou, =, ~ ant,nent
cumstances surrouhuins i.s '' cai,a,v
or OF the, absurd resuits VIII, 49, ,o
from giving such nroau lilea,'e ,'ho -,
the words. makes II unreasonaap,s, ~
believe that the LEGISLATOR intenoeo ~
include the particular ac,'
THE whole of TINS OPINION con
stitute in effect an argument tn1'
literal construction shouid no. ,e pe
given TO the statute, but feasonhple
Interpretation, not the RUE ol Wy
letter which kills. the court Wh,cn
concurred in that opinion ineluueu