Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-12-05
and 18th Streets w. B. Moses & Sons Founded so Years

- L A41S& i \ Ill OS4 ~ ~ W.
ton of manufacturers Of electric lamps,
a southern wholesale grocers' association,
an interlocutory decree against the Pow
der Trust with directions by the circuit
court compelling dissolution, anu other
combinations of similar history are now
negotiating with the Department Of JUS
tice looking to disintegration by decree
and reorganization in accordance with
law. 1t seems possible to bring about
these reorganizations without general
business disturbance.
Movement for Repeal Of the Anti
Trust Law.
/ But now that the antitrust act is seen
to be effective for the accomplishment OF
the purpose of its enactment, we are met
by cry from many different quarters for
Its repeal It is said to be obstructive of
business progress, to be an attempt to re-
store old-fashioned methods of destruc-
tive competition between small units, and
to make impossible those useful cOmbi-
nations of capital, and the reductions of
the cost of production that, are essential
to continued prosperity and normal
growth. -
In the recent decisions the Supreme
Court makes clear that. there Is nothing
in the statute which condemns cOmbina-
tons of capital or mere bigness of plant
organized to secure economy In produc-
ton and a reduction Of its cost 1t Is
only when the purpose or necessary effect
Of the ORGANIZATION and maintenance OF
the combination or the aggregations OF
immense size are the sitting of competi-
ton, actual and potential. and the en-
HANGING of prices and establishing
monopoly, that the statute is violated.
Mere size Is no sin against the law. The
merging OF two or more business plants
necessarily eliminates, competition be-
tween the units thus combined, but this
elimination Is In contravention of the
statute only when the combination is
made for purpose OF ending this particu-
lar competition in order to secure control
of and enhance prices and create
monopoly.
Lack of Definiteness in the Statute.
The complaint is made of the statute
that it is not sufficiently definite in its
description Of that which Is forbidden. to
enable business men to avoid its violation.
The suggestion Is, that we may have
combination of two corporations. which
may run on for years. and that subse-
quently the Attorney General may con-
clude that it was a violation of the
statute. and that which was supposed by
the combiners to be innocent then turns
out to be a combination In violation OF
the statute. The answer to this hypo-
thetical case is that when men attempt to
amass such stupendous capital as will
enable them. to suppress competition. con-
troll prices and establish monopoly.
they know the purpose OF their acts. Men
do not do such a thing without having II
nd hot
ly for the purpose of reducing the cost
of productions, without the thought of
suppressing competition by use or the
bigness of the plant they are creating.
then they cannot be convicted at the
time the union is made. nor can they be
convicted later, unless 1t happen that
later on they conclude to suppress com
petition and take the usual methods for
doing So and thus establish TOR them
case, hardly complain II the motive
which subsequently is disclosed is at
tributed by the court to the original COM
bination.
New Remedies Suggested.
Much is said Of the repeal Of this
statute and Of constructive legislation
intended to accomplish the purpose
and blaze clear path for honest
merchants and business men to fol-
low It may be that such a plan will
be evolved. but submit that the dis
cussions which have been brought OUT
in recent days by the fear Of the con-
tinued execution Of the antitrust law
have produced nothing but gl1ttertng
generalities and have offered no line
Of distinction or rule OF action as den-
mite and as clear as that which the
Supreme Court itself lays down In en-
forcing the statute.
supplemental Legislation Needed,
Not Repeal or Amendment.
I see no objection-and indeed l can
see decided advantages-in the en-
actment of a law which shall describe
and denounce methods Of competition
which are unfair and are badges of
the unlawful purpose denounced in the
antitrust law. The attempt and pur-
pose to suppress q competitor by un-
derselling him at price so unproft-
able as to drive him out of business
or the making OF exclusive contracts
with customers under which they are
other manufacturers. and numerous
kindred methods for sitting compe-
tition and effecting monopoly. should
be described with sufficient accuracy In
a criminal statute on the one hand to
enable the government to shorten it's
task by prosecuting single misdemean-
ors instead of an entire conspiracy.
and on the other hand. to serve the
purpose OF pointing out more In de-
tail to the business community what
must be avoided.
Federal Incorporation Recommended.
In special message to Congress on
January Z. 1910, ventured to point out
the disturbance to business that would
probably attend the dissolution Of these
offending trusts. said:
"But such an investigation and possible