Dakota farmers' leader. (Canton, S.D.) 1890-19??, 1911-12-08

~ ashington.-President Tafts annual
Usage, which wac read in both houses
III congress Tuesday, deals exclusively
\ )th the antitrust statute. The message
part is as follows:
ITO the Senate and House of Represent
IA lives: This message Is the first of sew
e al which I shall send to congress during
81 e interval between the opening OF Its
kgular session and it's adjournment for
e Christmas holidays. The amount of
II fornation to be communicated as to
e operations of the government, the
3 bmber of important subjects calling for
Il Eminent by the executive, and the trans
y Mission to congress of exhaustive re-
orts by special commissions. make 1T i'm
4 1ossible to include in one message of a
asonable length a discussion of the top
that ought to be brought to the at
ntion Of the national legislature at its
bst regular session.
NE Antitrust Law-The Supreme
8 Court Decisions.
in May last the Supreme court handed
bwn decisions IN the suits in equity
Fought by the United States to enjoin
he further maintenance of the Standard
oll trust and of the American Tobacco
frust, and to secure their dissolution. The
0eciSions are epoch-making and serve to
aAv1se the business world authoritat:vely
the scope and operation Of the anti
Gfust law of 1890. The decisions do not
Iepart in any substantial way from the
Ggevious decisions of the court In constru-
10g and applying this important statute,
Ut they clarity those important decisions
~ further defining the already admitted
= ceptions to the literal construction of
tie act. BY the DEGREES, they furnish a
II eful precedent as to the proper method
~ dealing with the capital and property
- illegal trusts. These decisions sug-
est the need and wisdom of additional
supplemental legislation to make it
- sier for the entire business community
u square with the rule of action and
hgality 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 Of Decision
Merely In Form Of Expression.
THE statute in it's first section declares
q be illegal "every contract, combination
n the form Of trust or otherwise, or con-
gGpiracy, in restraint Of trade or COM
merce among the several states or with
Foreign nations" and In the second, de-
clares guilty of a every per-
son who shall monopolize or attempt to
monopoliZe or combine or conspire with
any other person to monopolize any part
OF the trade or m Of the several
states or with foreign nations"
In two early cases, where the statute
was invoked to enjoin a transportation
agreement between interstate railroad
companies, 1t was held that 1t was no de-
Tense to show that the agreement as to
rates complained of was reasonal at COM
mon law, because 1T was said that the
statute was directed against all con-
tracts and combinations in restraint OF
trade whether reasonal at common law
or not. It was plain from the record,
however. that the contracts complained
of IN those cases would not have been
deemed reasonable at common law.
It has been said that the court. by in
Producing into the construction Of the
statute common law distinctions, has
emasculated it. This is obviously untrue.
BY its Judgment every contract and COM
bination in restraint of interstate trade
made with the purpose, or necessary Ell
feet of controlling prices by sitting COM
petition, or of establishing in whole or IN
part a monopoly of such trade, Is con-
demned by the statute. The most eX-
IRENE critics cannot instance a case that
ought to be condemned under the statute
i which Is not brought within its terms as
Athus construed.
The suggestion Is also made that the Su-
preme court by its decisions in the last
two cases has committed to the court the
undefned and unlimited discretion to de-
termine whether a case or restraint OF
trade is within the terms Of the statute.
This Is wholly untrue. A reasonable re-
straint of trade at common law IS Weil
Understood and is clearly defined. 1t does
not rest in the discretion of the court. II
must be limited to accomplish the purpose
of a lawful main contract to which, IN
order that it shall be enforceable at all
1t must be incidental. If it exceeds the
needs of that contract 1T Is void.
The Remedy in Equity by Dissolution.
In the Standard Oil case the Supreme
and circuit courts found the combination
TO be a monopoly Of the interstate busl-
ness of refining, Transporting ana mar
keting petroleum and it's products. erect
ed and maintained through thirty-seVen
different corporations, the stock of which
was held by a New Jersey company. II
IN effect commanded the dissolution OF
this combination. directed the transfer
and pro-rata distribution by the New Jer-
4sey p of the stock held by 1t IN
the thirty-seven corporations TO anu
among it's stockholders, and the corpora
Mons and individual defendants were en-
Joined from conspiring or combining to
restore such monopoly: and all agree
ments between the subsidiary corporations
Tending to produce or bring about further
Violations of the act were enJolned-
In the Tobacco case, the court louhu
that Nthe Individual defendants, twenty
nine in number, had been engaged In q
successful effort to acquire complete do
minion over the manufacture, sale, ana
distribution of tobacco in this country
and abroad. and that this had been done
by combinations made with a purpose
and effect to stif1e competition. control
prices. and establish a monopoly, not
only in the manufacture of tobacco, but
also of tin-foil and Gcorice, USED IN It's
manufacture and of its products of c-
wars. cigarettes and snuffs. The tobacco
suft presentend a far more complicated
and difficult case than the Standard Oh
suit for a decree which would efectuate
4he will of the court and end the viola
Non of the statute. There was here no
gdngle holding company as in the case
OF the Standard Oil trust. The main com
many was the American Tobacco com
many. a manufacturing, selling and ho..d-
Ing company. The plan adopted to ,le-
troy the combination and restore comee-
6tion involved the redivision of the ctp1-
I'll and plants of the whole trust between
0pme of the companies constituting the
2trust and new companies organized Tor
HE purposes of the decree and made far-
Ties to it, and numbering. new and old,
1ourteen.
Elm the original suit there were twenty
II ane defendants who were charged with
Y ling the conspirators through whom the
a0Iegal combination acquired and exercised