Arizona republican., 1911-12-31

life would aid the executive and jul dicial authorities in construing and applying the statute justly in all cases as they should arise. The com mittee recognized the perfect sound ness of the proposition laid down by a very eminent scholar and theologian that When we find document as serting or implying certain universal and fundamental principles, and at the same time making statements ap- parently or really in contradiction with the same, it is plain that our choice must be in favor of the more universal and fundamental principles; that ambiguous statements must be interpreted in agreement with them; that contradictory statements must he quietly ignored"
 That belief has now. on the whole. been realized IL is believed that no case founded on the act has been finally decided by the courts ad versely to the contracts or conduct accused in which such contract or conduct did not offend against both the letter and spirit of the act. as well as against the sound public pol T the constitution and the act of con- gress touching the subject, while the reserved rights of the several states have been preserved; and aggressions of powerful combinations in various forms and various ways upon weaker enterprises have been denounced. all though, unhappily, not yet fully pre- vented It is to be hoped that here after the penal provisions of the act will be brought into full exercise as well as those of d civil character. The fear that some literal construc- ton of the words restraint of trade in the act might lead to the sacrifice of some just fair and wholesome business arrangements may be safe ly dismissed Tor if the principle and purpose of the constitution and act have any foundation at all there can be no such restraint, because such conduct is not restraining, but is pro motive of and beneficial to the pub lie interest.
 If in a particular community there be two grist-mills grinding the grain brought by surrounding farmers; each does it well, but the supply of grain will permit the mills to run only half time. the owners. in order to pay their employees fair wages and make d living profit, are compelled to charge the farmers too high prices for grinding or else fail They con tract to combine forces and do all the grinding in one of the mills and use the other for saving lumber, and thus save the farmers from excessive tolls. pay the employees full wages, and make fair profit themselves. Is that d contract in restraint of trade? Common sense says no. Pub lie policy says no. Both say that 1t Is the reverse. and that it helps busi- ness. labor, and the public.
 And SD of trade and commerce and so-called monopoly if the party con- cerned can show (and it is for him to show) that his contract or act promotes and benefits trade and is consistent with the general and equal welfare of the whole people. and thus recognized by the public policy stated in an earlier part of this ar ticle it is not any restraint of the trade or the creation or the attempt to create the monopoly prohibited by the act It is the contracting or conspiring and the monopoly that are viciou and not the subjects of them.-Ex- Senator George F. Ed munds. in the North American Re view.
 -O-