Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-05-17
HARLAn's OPINION.

CONTINUED from Page One.)
tration to strengthen the antitrust
law or solve a problem that yester-
days decision seems to have made
more vexations than ever before.
To visitors tonight President Taft
declared that he had no present inten-
ton of sending a special message to
Congress proposing additional anti
trust legislation.
There is no intention upon the part
of the administration to check the ac-
tiyities. of the department of justice.
Trusts found violating the antitrust
act will be proceeded against as in the
past.
Although the matter has been con-
sidered, it seemed probable tonight
that there would be no attempt to pro-
coed criminally against the directors
Of the Standard Oil.
AS whole the cabinet is more likely
to favor a federal incorporation law
than an amendment to the Sherman
act.
Justice Harlans dissenting opinion,
delivered orally and without notes, was
available in its entirety for the first
time tonight and received most care
full consideration. Even yet the opin-
ion is not In its final form and I'M
doubleday will be very greatly elabor-
ated. AS stated from the bench. JUS
tiee Harlan's opinion in full was as
follows
Il feel constrained by sense of duty
to state some objections which | have
IN hn nj 4 he ri nh
have heretofore examined in type
writing
shall not say nothing about the
decree, except to say that upon the
arguments on this act some years ago,
and since my examination of this casa,
came to the conclusion that the de-
cree of the circuit court was substan-
TALLY right in all particulars,
AS to the notifications referred to
by the learned judges when | see the
opinion and the decree in print / can
understand them BETTER and in the
opinion which l am hereafter 10 file.
! can express my views distinctly as
to those notifications.
AS to all the chief justice has said
about the Illegal combination Of this
oil company and its coming within the
antitrust act, / cordially concur
There are, however, some things in
this opinion, and that are the result
from this opinion. which I think may
very we'll alarm thoughtful men. or
many thoughtful men; and l am will
ling TO let them pass with any idea
that 1 approve them.
The antitrust act of 1890 was passed
at time when this country was in a
state of great unrest. arising out of an
enormous aggregation of capital in a
few hands, and arising out of com
binations which had their hands upon
the throat of this country in respect
even TO the necessities of life; and
Congress had before it the great ques-
ZION as to how these evils were to be
remedied, so far as Congress had the
pow CT 10 remedy them The question
as:
What shall we do They finally
after srent debate by able statesmen,
passed the antitrust act of 1890. Let
me cali your attention. to a few of the
words VI that act. 1t provides, in Sec
ton /.
THAT every contract. combination in
form of trust or otherwise. or con-
spiracs -"
Not in restraint of trade as the
learned chief justice said in one part
OF his remarks. but --
In restraint of trade among the
several states and with foreign nations
is hereby declared to be Illegal"
Congress has nothing to do with do
nestle trade in the states. but as to
interstate trade it has a great deal to
do and therefore,, it fell upon this policy.
The men who were in the Congress
of the United States at that time knew
what the common law was about the
restraint OF trade. They knew what
restraints of trade at common law
were lawful, and what were unlawful
But Congress said:
The surest way 10 protect inter-
state commerce is not to start upon
any distinctions at all as To the kinds
OF trade, not every contract in re-
straint of trade among the states is
hereby declared to be Illegal"
Then, in the second section:
Every person who shall monopoliz,
or attempt to monopolize or combine
or eonspire with any other person OF
persons to monopolize, '--
Monopoiize what?
Any part of interstate trade OF
commerce. shall be liable to the pen
alties prescribed by this act.
what becomes, then. of the state.
ment that this act did not condemn
alVnopoly in dtself9 Ibid NOD these men
kto's WAT nonppstt Was ~ Ana When
saSa