The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1911-01-02
BRIEF OF U. S.
The Governments Argument in
the Tobacco Case
Is Given Out by Attorney Gen.
eral Wickersham.
ON COURTS DECISION.
Is Believed to Depend the Other
Trust Cases.
Similar Points at Issue Regard
ing Standard Oil.
ON COURTS DECISION.

Washington, Jan. 2.-The brief of
the government in the tobacco case
has been made public. 1t has been
prepared by Attorney General Wicker
sham and his special assistant, ]. c.
McReynolds.
Mr.. Wickersham also is supervis-
ing the preparation of the forth
coming arguments of the government
in the Standard Oil dissolution suit.
Hence, it is generally believed, the
theories advanced in the tobacco case
brief will be followed in the Standard
Oil case, and, If approved by the SUI
preme court, will be the law for years
to come.
In contrast with the subordination
of the point year ago. when the to-
bacco case was argued before the
court for the first time, the govern
ment now emphasizes it's position that
the Sherman antitrust law should not
be Interpreted so as to put the stamp
of illegality upon every sort of re-
straint of interstate or foreign COM
merce.
Such a theory has been advanced
before in the interest of the good
trusts as distinguished from the
bad" ones. At the same time the
government demands that the right of
congress to regulate interstate and
foreign commerce be preserved un-
tramme1ed.
To this end it would allow congress
the power to strike at things possibly
outside of interstate commerce, such
as a monopoly of manufacture. if the
direct and necessary consequences
thereof be to nullify rules for the reg
ulation of interstate and foreign COM
merce.
The revised argument of the gov
ernment says that the will of con-
gress in respect to the power to regu-
late Interstate and foreign commerce
is supreme unless shown to conflict
with some provision of the constitu-
ton.
All Power to- Congress.
The government asserts that con-
gress has the power not only to indi-
cate it's will, but also the power to
enforce observance of it. So the con-
clusion is reached that if reason
able necessity arises, congress may
strike down by statute a thing outside
Of Interstate or foreign commerce that
interferes with this supreme will
In order for a reasonable neces-
sity" to arise, it is said in the brief
that a certain nearness of relationship
must exist between what the statute
directly strikes and interstate or for
eign commerce. That relationship, it
is acknowledged, probably is not sus-
ceptible of rigorous definition.
Mere indirect, incidental or re-
mote effect on commerce is not suf-
ficient,'' the government says. but
whatever as a natural and probable
consequence, will occasion material
hindrance to the efficacious operation
of the lawful will of congress in ref
erence thereto is near enough"
The government contends that the
majority of the court came to an
erroneous conclusion in the famous
Knight case. which Former President
Roosevelt criticized last summer in a
speech.
eve submit, with diffidence," says the
government, mat failure to recognize
that the poweWto regulate commerce
for limited purposes authorizes 1egisla-
ton touching what is no part thereof,
caused the majority to hold in the
United States against E C. Knight &
Co. that the act prohibiting contracts,
combinations and monopolies in re-
straint of Interstate commerce did not
apply to a monopoly of sugar refineries
which distributed their output there
in
New Thoughts on Monopolies.
It is contended by the government
that it's argument disposes of the de-
fense by the American Tobacco COM
nanv that it is engaged merely in