Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1911-09-18
(By Associated Press. J

l6y Associated PfeSe.)
DETROIT, Mich, Sept. 18-Presi
dent Taft, at luncheon with the
board of commerce here today made
the first of what may be termed the
political speeches of his six weeks
o. tour of the country. He spoke OF
the trusts and clearly outlined his
views concerning them. He defend
ed with vigor the decisions of the
United States supreme court in the
standard Oil and Tobacco trusts
cases, and there was a distinct cam.
paign note in Taft's H1allenge to his
ancient political enemy, William Jen.
nings Bryan, to point out what par.
ticular contract or restraint of trade
he would condemn, which would not
be condemned within the definition OF
the statute as laid down by Chief Jus.
tice White. Taft added rather signifl.
cantly that persons who do not under
stand the decisions, and really do not
understand law, have had great deal
to say about them.
1t was not fair to the court, he de.
clared, to say that it had read the
word reasonable" in the antitrust
statute. II am entirely opposed to
an amendment of the antitrust law,
said the president. 1T is now a val
liable government asset, an instru-
ment tested and brought into bene.
fetal use by twenty years of litiga.
tion and construction by the highest
court. Why should we imperil it's
usefulness by experiments"
The outcry for amendment follow
ing the supreme courts decisions. the
president said, had resulted in pro-
posals prepared without a real un ler-
standing of the law, and he added,
that while this agitation might serve
the purpose of promoting unreason-
able" and "unreasoning" discomfort,
it certainly ought not to be considered
seriously. Taft referred to the fact
that Immediately after the trust de-
cisions were handed down by the su-
preme court, senator La Toilette
spread on public record, quoting from
one Of the presidents messages, as
being at variance with the rule of
reason laid down by the court" The
president asserted that his views as
in the message were in ex.
act accord with the decisions.
His speech in full was as follows:
My Fellow Citizens: I propose to
lake up the question which has occu-
pied the attention of the American
people for now 20 years, that of indus
rial combinations known as trusts"
During the last year We have had two
great decisions by the supreme court
If the United States. They are epoch
making, and the public has not yet
,ome to realize the effect that those
decisions are certain to have. 1t is
lot that the construction which the
:ourt has put upon the act is deterrent
rom that which most members of
he profession, and most subordinate
ourts, and indeed the supreme court
tself, had before indicated as the pro-
er construction of the statute; but 1T
$ that it is now finally settled, by
wo fully considered decisions in re-
pect to two of the largest and most
owerful of these combinations, what
heir illegality consists in, and how
hey are to be treated, in view of the
nding that they are illegal and do
iolate the provisions of the so-called
nti trust or Sherman act.
Persons who do not understand the
feet of these decisions and really do
OF understand the law have great
cal to say which is intended to lead
le public to belief that in some way
r other the supreme court has emas.
llated the statute and prevented it's
peration against Objectionable and
furious trade combinations and con-
)iracies. Nothing is further from the :
nth. ,
When the statute was passed in -,
800 the expressions used in it to ,
efine its object and what it proposed =
lerein to denounce as unlawful were =
ot new, but they were sufficiently +.
'oad and indefinite to require judic- :
l construction to settle their mean. -.
e. Congress was dealing with a !;
lbject matter in respect to which it
ay be assumed that the legislators !.
were not clear as to the -.
lact limitations of the meaning of
le words in the statute they we're !.
assing. They knew there was an J..
I'll which they hoped to Restrain by =.
le enactment of this lak, and they :
lied. upon the courts in their con- i.
ruction of the law to hedge about -.
> operation such restriction as would :,
event the statute from being SO wide :,
its application as to involve absurd .
= and the impracticable. The early