The river press. [volume] (Fort Benton, Mont.) 1880-current, 1911-12-06

iii wv e la VI - wv u mi ull OUo
p~ortunity for continued cooperation
must disappear. Those critics who
speak Of this disintegration In the trust
as a mere change Of garments have not
given consideration to the inevitable
working Of the decree and understand
little the personal danger of attempt
ing to evade or set at naught the SOL
emn injunction of a court whose object
Is made plain by the decree and whose
nhibitions are set forth with a detail
and comprehensiveness unexampled in
the history Of equity Jurisprudence.
Voluntary Reoreanizations Of Other
Trusts At Hand.
The effect of these two decisions has
led to DEGREES dissolving the combina.
ton of manufacturers of electric
lamps, u southern wholesale grocers'
association. an interlocutory decree
against the powder trust, with direc-
tons by the circuit court compelling
dissolution. and other combinations of
a similar history are now negotiating
with the department of Justice looking
to a disintegration by decree and re-
organization in accordance with law.
It seems possible to bring about these
reorganizations without general bust
ness disturbance.
Movement For Repeal Of the Anti.
trust Law.
But now that the antitrust act is
seen to be effective for the accomplish
ment of the purpose Of its enactment
we are met by a cry from many differ
ent quarters for its repeal. It is said
to be obstructive of business progress.
to be an attempt to restore old fash
toned methods of destructive competi-
ton between small units and to make
impossible those useful combinations
Of capital and the reduction of the cost
of production that are essential to coE-
tinued prosperity and normal growth.
In the recent decisions the supreme
court makes clear that there is moth
ing in the statute which condemns
combinations of capital or mere big
ness of plant organized to secure econ.
omy in production and a reduction of
it's cost. 1t is only when the purpose
or necessary effect of the organization
| and maintenance of the combination
or the aggregation of immense size are
the sitting Of competition. actual and
potential, ard the enhancing of prices
and establishing u monopoly that the
statute is violated. Mere size is nc
| sin against the law. The merging OF
two or more business plants necessari
ly eliminates competition between the
units thus combined, but this elimina'
ton is in contravention OF the statute
only when the combination is made fol
purpose of ending this particular com
petition in order to secure control OF
and enhance prices and create a mo
nopoly.
Lack Of Definiteness In the Statute.
The complaint is made of the stat
ute that 1t is not sufficiently definite
in it's description Of that which Is for
hidden to enable business men to ayoit
ITS violation. The suggestion Is tina
we may have a combination OF tw'
corporations which may run on TO
years and that subsequently the at
torney general may conclude that !
was a violation of the statute and tina
which was supposed by the combiner
to be innocent then turns out to be
combination in violation of the statute
The answer to this hypothetical cas-
Is that when men attempt to amas
such stupendous capital as will enabl
them to suppress competition, contrt
prices and establish a monopoly the
know the purpose Of their acts. Me
do not do such a thing without havin
it clearly in mind. If what they do
merely for the purpose Of reducing tn
/ cost of production, without the though
! of s%uppressing competition by use of til
bigness of the plant they are creating
then they cannot be convicted at til
: time the union is made, nor can the
2 be convicted later unless it happe
!, that later on they conclude to SUI
t press competition and take the usu'
q methods for doing so and thus estaI
2 lish for themselves a monopoly. The
can in such a case hardly complain
n the motive which subsequently is di
closed is attributed by the court to Il
h original combination.
l. New Remedies Suggested.
e Much Is said Of the repeal Of til
statute and of constructive legislati,
intended to accomplish the purpo
e and blaze a clear path for honest mt
= chants and business men to follow.
l. may be that such a plan will
le evolved. but submit that the discr
r. sions which have been brought out
recent days by the fear Of the CO
e. tinued execution Of the antitrust Ia
e. have produced nothing but glitteri
e generalities and have offered no Ii
80 Of distinction or rule Of action as dc
le mite and as clear as that which the
preme court itself lays down in {
forcing the statute.
g. Supplemental Legislation Needed, 4
IN Repeal or Amendment.
I see no objection, and indeed I c
see decided advantages. in the ena