The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1911-05-30

a
manufacturers OF lieorice. another es-
D sential ingredient in the manufacture
/ OF tobacco. and the American Stogie
I Company. were considered at length
Finally he came down 70 the merger
In 1904. OF the old American Tobacco
/ Company. the Continental Tobacco
Company and the Consolidated Tobac-
! CO Company In the new American To-
bacco Company. Through the method
Of distribution OF the stock OF the new
company. the chief justice said that
j. b. Duke. Thomas r. Ryan. William
{. Whitney. Anthony y. Brady. Peter
a. b. Nidener and Oliver n. Payne
were able TO continue the control in
the new company that they had ex-
ercised in the old.
A few words were said concerning
the trade war between the big British
Tobacco Company. the Imperial ana
I the American Tobacco Company. and
finally the organization by these two
companies OF the British American
I Tobacco Company TO carry on "A to-
bacco business outside OF England and
the United states.
Standard Case Affects.
Justice White said that the obscur-
! 49, AAN ithu4AAhh uncertainty which
had enshrouded the Sherman anti
trust act had been removed BY the
consideration the court had given the
law in the STANDARD Oil case recently
decided. The chief Justice then
launched forth into defense OF the
rule Of reason law as laid down by
the court In the Standard OH case.
He said.
In that case IL was held. without
departing from any previous decision
OF the court that as the statute had
not defined the words restraint OF
trade. 1t became necessary 10 con
strue those words. a duty which could
only be discharged by n resort 10
4 reason. We say the doctrine thus
stated was In accord with all the
| previous decisions OF this court.
despite the fact that the contrary view
was sometimes enormously attributed
10 some OF the expressions used In
two prior decisions tthe Transmits
souri, freight association and Joint
| traffic casesl. That such view was a
mistaken one was fully pointed out IN
d The Standard Oil case. In other words
n was held not that acts which the
statute prohibited could be- removed
/ from the control OF its prohibitions by
| "A finding that they were unreasonable.
but that the dIty 20 interpret which
inevitably arose from their general
/ character. restraint OF trade required
that The words restraint uf trade
should be given "a meaning which
would not destroy the individual rigl-
To contract and render diaicllt 81 not
impossible any movement OF frade IN
The channels OF Interstate commerce.
the free movement OF which % was
the purpose OF the statute 10 protect.
The soundness OF the rule that the
statute should receive q reasonable
construction after further mature de-
/ liberation. We see uo reason 20 doubt"
Application Of Law
When II came fo am application or
the law as laid down 100 the standard
/ OH case Co the tobacco case. AN the
difficulties suggested by the mere
form in which The assaiied trausac-
lions Wcr" clothed became o' no mo-
Went This Nas because. he said. the
Standard pi ease held tAat every
conceivable act which could possibly
come within The spirit or purpose OF
The prohibition OF the law without Tee
gard 90 the porb in which such acts
. We're clothed We're embraced Iu the
law
The court next took gp the problem
. OF determining whether TIE acts. con
tracts. combinations. etc. complain
. cd az We're al such IAN unusual and
/ wrongful character as to bring them
within tnc prohibitions ~ the law.
ON This point tho chief Justice said.
The history CD, fhr combination SIS
500 roplcfo V'h the doing of acts
WE CD if Was the obvious Uuruo-. OF