The citizen-Republican. (Scotland, Bon Homme County, S.D.) 1???-19??, 1911-12-07
First Epistle of Mr.. Taft Deals
Altogether With the Prob
lem of Trusts.
DEFENDS SUPREME COURT

dealt entirely With the trust QueS-
ton. The president says that between
now and the Christmas holidays he will
send in a series of messages, each one
dealing with separate matters of legis-
lation for the consideration Of congress
this winter.
Text of the Message.
The full text of the message is as
follows:
To the Senate and House of Representa-
tives:
This message is the first of several
which l shall send to congress during the
interval between the opening of its regu-
lar session and it's adjournment for the
Christmas holidays. The amount of in
formation to be communicated as to the
operations OF the government, the number
Oh important subjects calling for COM
ment by the executive, and the transmits
sion to congress of exhaustive reports of
special commissions, make it impossible
to include in one message of a reasonable
length a discussion of the topics that
the national legislature at its first regular
session.
Supreme Court Decisions.
an I'm MAY last the supreme court handed
brought by the United States to enioin
the further maintenance of the STANDARD
ON trust and of the American Tobacco
trust, and to secure their dissolution. The
decisions are epoch-making and serve to
advise the business world authoritatively
OF the scope and operation of the anti
trust act of 1880. The decisions do not de-
part in any substantial way from the
previous decisions of the court in con-
STRUNG and applying this important stat
ute, but they clarity those decisions by
further defining the already admitted eX-
ceptions to the literal construction of the
act. BY the decrees,. they furnish a use
ful precedent as to the proper method of
dealing with the capital and property of
illegal trusts. These decisions SUCCESS
the need and wisdom of additional or sup
Elemental legislation to make it easier for
the entire business community to square
with the rule of action and legality thus
finally established and to preserve the
benefit, freedom and spur of reasonable
competition without loss of real efficiency
or progress.
No Change in the Rule.
The statute in it's first section declares
TO be Illegal every contract, combination
spiracy, In restraint of trade or commerce
among the several states or with foreign
nations" and in the second, declares
guilty of a misdeneanor every person
VINO shall monopolize or combine or con-
-fpire with any other person to monopolize
any part OF the trade or of the
several states or with foreign nations"
In two early cases. where the statute
was invoked to enjoin a transportation
rate agreement between interstate rail-
road companies, it was held I--t 1t was
no defense to show that the agreement
as to rates complained of was reasonable
ct common law, because it was said that
the statute was directed against all con-
tracts and combinations in restraint OF
trade whether reasonable at common law
or not. II vas plain from the record,
however. that the contracts complained
OF in those eases would not nave been
deemed reasonable at common law. An
subsequent cases the court said that the
statute should be given a reasonable CON
strGction and refused to include within
Its inhibition, certain, c~ontractufal re
straints of trade which it dominated as
incidental or indirect.
These cases of restraint OF trade that
the court excepted from the operation OF
the statute were instances which, at COM
mon law, would have been called reason
able. In the Standard Oil and Tobacco
cases, therefore, the court merely adopted
the tests of the common law, and in de-
fining exceptions to the literal application
of the statute, only substituted for the
test of being incidental or incorrect, that
of being reasonable, and this, without
varying in the slightest the actual scope
and effect of the statute. In other words,
all the cases under the statute which have
now been decided would have been de:
cided the same way If the court had
originally accepted in its construction the
rule at common law.
1t has been said that the court, by intro
ducing into the construction of the stat
ute COMMON law distinctions, has emas'
culated it. This is obviously untrue. ~
its judgment every contract and comb
nation in restraint of interstate trade
with the purpose or necessary effect OF
controlling prices by sitting competition
or of establishing in whole or part a mo
'nopoly of such trade, is condemned. by
the statute The most extreme critics
cannot instance a case that ought to be-
condemned under the statute which i:
not brought within It's terms as thus con
strued.
The suggestion Is also made that the
supreme court by its decision in the las
two cases has committed to the court IT tn
terinine whether 6. case of restraint l.
within the terms of the statute. rms J!
wholly untrue. a reasonable restraint o
trade at common law is well understood
and is clearly defined. 1t does not rest il
the discretion of the court. 1t must b.
. lirnifaI tn nnrrn,plf-l, tho n11rrnca nf
lawful main contract to which, in orde
that it shall be enforceable at all, it mus
be Incidental r. it exceeds the needs o
Tho test of reasonableness was neve
applied by the court at common law Z
contracts or combinations or conspiracie
In Restraint of trade whose purpose wa
or whose necessary effect would be t
sstaolasf3 hp eeennna,,e 10 c qlhe courts pitee neve e
assumed power to say that such contract
or combinations or conspiracies might b
lawful If the parties to them were onl
moderate in the use of the power thu
occurred and did not exact from the pub
NC too great and exorbitant prices. 1t !
gagged in business violating the statute
have hoped that some such line could b
drawn by courts; but no court of author
tty has ever attempted it. Certainly Their
Is nothing in the decisions of the lates
two cases from which such a dangerou
theory of judicial discretion In enforcin
this statute can derive the slightest sane
Statute a Matter of Growth.
We have been 81 years making this stat
ute effective for the purposes for which
was enacted. The Knight case was dis
couraging and seemed to remit to til
states the whole available power to al
tack and suppress the evils of the trusts
Slowly, however, the error of that tude
ment was corrected, and only in the las
three Or four years has the heavy han
of the law been laid upon the great illega
combinations that have exercised such a
absolute dominion over many of our ir
dustries. Criminal prosecutions hay
been brought and a number are pendina
but iuries have felt averse to convictin
for jail sentences on men of respectful
standing in society whose ofense ha
been regarded as merely statutory. Still
as the offense becomes better understood
and the committing of it partakes NOR
of studied and deliberate defiance of tn
law, we can be confident that jurias wi
convict individuals and that Jail ser
fences Will be imposed.
Remedy BY Dissolution.
In the Standard Oil case the supren1
and circuit courts found the comhiaatic