Watertown leader. [volume] (Watertown, Jefferson County, Wis.) 1909-1911, 1911-05-19

in violation Of the statute ard thJs
neutralize the extension aud contln-
ually operating force which the posses
sion of the power uniawiuEy 90
tanned was brought, and will continue
to bring about.
In applying remedies for this pur-
pose. however, the fact must not De
overlooked that injury TO the puoilc'
that prevention of an undue restraint
or the monopolization OF trade or
commerce is the foundation upon winch
the prohibitions Of the statute rest ana
that one of the fundamentals
purposes of the statute IS to protect
not to destroy the rights OF properly.
Must Turn Back Stock
1.-The court below adjudged that the
New Jersey corporation, insofar as II
held stock of the various corporations
a combination in violation Of the act
and an attempt to monopolze or q ilo-
contrary to the section OF
the act. 1t commanded the dissolution
of the combination and therefore dl-
reefs the transfer by the New Jersey
corporation back to the stockholders
of the various subsidiary corporations
entitled to the same amount or the
stock which had been turned over TO
the New Jersey company in exchange
for it's stock.
$50 far as the owners Of the stock OF
the subsidiary corporations and the
corporations themselves were con-
cerned. after the stock had been trans
ferred section of the decree enjoined
them from in any way cOnspirlng OF
combining to violate the act or to mo"
nopolize or attempt to monopolize in
virtue of their ownership of the stock
transferred to them and prohibited al.
agreements between the subsidiary
corporations of other stockholders i'll
the future, tending to produce or bring
about further violations Of the act.
Enjoined From Interstate Trade.
''By section 7, pending the accom-
plishment Of the dissolution OF the
combination by the transfer of the
stock and until it was consummated,
the defendants named in section l,
constituting all the corporations to
which we have referred, were enJolned
from engaging in or carrying on III
terstate commerce. And by section 9,
among other things, a delay Of thirty
days was granted for the carrying into
effect of the decree.
$50 far as the decree held ownership
in the New Jersey corporation constl-
tuted a monopoly in violation OF the
first section and an attempt to create
a monopoly under the second section
and commanded the dissolution Of the
combination, the decree was clearly
appropriate.
Not Every Restraint of Trade.
Probably the most important propo-
sition of law laid down in the opinion
was that the words in the statute,
every restraint of trade are not to
be literally construed, but are to be
construed in the light Of reason.
On this point the court held that
the position of the government that
the Supreme court had decided that
any qualification of this phrase was
VI
Supreme court was erroneous. Speak
ing Of this error Of the government,
the chief justice said:
"This is true because as the acts
which may come under the classes
stated in the first section and the re,
straint of trade to which that section
applies are not specifically enumera
ted or defined, it is obvious that judg-
ment must in every case be called into
play in order to determine whether a
particular case is embraced within the
statutory classes, and whether, ii the
act is within such classes it's nature
or effect causes it to be a restraint OF
trade within the intendment of the
act
Holds Court Has jurisdiction.
Chief Justice White first went inte
an extensive recital of the facts in the
case and then held that the court had
jurisdiction over the suit, which had
been questioned by the Standard Oil.
The chief justice, following his usual
custom, rendered the opinion without
any notes. The recital of the case
was dramatic in the extreme, the
jurist emphasizing his points by vigor
Gus gestures, raising his voice at times
and again rapping his desk.
With eloquent sentences he summed
up the immense magnitude of the case
and the gigantic work which was be
fore the court.
The fact that the court continued tt
sit past the regular hour set for I'D
iournment is unprecedented in it's re
cent history.
The chief justice traced the devel
opment of the term monopoly
through the English law. He referred
to the fact that the Standard Oil com
pany had been called an enormous oc
topus, and yet he said great benefits
had come from it's life as corpora
| ton.
The chief justice said the conten
lions in the case were as divergent a.
| the ends of the earth. He spoke OF
Jungle" Of testimony and of law.