The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-05-17
Justice Harlan Denoun-|
ces Usurpation Of Leg
islative Functions.
MOST ALARMING 5
TENDENCY OF DAY.
Refuses to Be Party to Reversal
Of Decisions Heretofore Rem
dered-President Taft Said
to Be Keenly Disappointed
at Limits Put on Anti
Trust Law.

ashington, D. c., May 16.-Goyern- K
mental Washington. In all its branches Il
Legislative, executive and Judicial
gave over the greater part of to-day
TO discussion Of the Supreme Courts
disposition of the Standard Oil ca Sc.
while there was much gratiflcation 4
IN administration circles over the Or
uer lor the dissolution of the giant cor K
poratlon, which had been declared an
unreasonab BILE" combination and monon
Oily In restraint of trade. there, unaucs-
tlonaolE was also some misgivings as
70 the interpretation of the anti trust
INV, giving TO courts tho right to de-
termine whether or not a monopoiy was
reasonable" and declaring u reason yi
nole monopoly not TO be in contrayen-
ton of the statute. iS#a
President Taft who. n litt,o r,ora
than year ago. in a special message
to Congress. declared that under SUI
premo Court presidents there could be
no such things as reasonable" and "ln-
reasonable restraints of trade. or In
other words. good trusts" and chad
trusts. was said to-day to have been
rather keenly disappointed that the
, should have seen fit 10 reverse
itselr In this Important ma tier. t
,rart's Message Quoted. i
President Tafts message was fraelv
quoted about the Capitol to-day. and
the seeming similarity OF his views as
20 the scope of the anti-trust law to
the View expressed by Associate Justiee
Harlan In his dissenting opinion of YES
terday attracted renewed attention 70
justice Harlan's position, as outlined
In his statement to the court
Justice Harlan held that his brother.
Judges had no right to ,isurp the ftinc-N
ton OF the legislative branch OF tho
sovernment by writing into the statute
a differentiation between .'reasonable.
ana unreasonable" He declared that
Sohs ress had resisted all appeals to SO
amend the act, and that there wa
every reason to believe that such an
amendment never could be put through
the legislative branch. Under tnesa cir
cumstances. and in their extremity
great aggregations OF wealth applied
70 the court In On effort to have 1t con-
strnc the law in way that would ba !. X
nat reversal OF what It had held on two
previous OCCASIONS Hl
1ustice Harlan declined to be partv
10 such reversal. and hence his dis.
sentins opinion He denounced as "tha
most alarming tendency OF the day,.
tho tendency to judicial lerislatIo,, 1T
Allen OF power. he said. alwnvs , ,.o.,
trying to get the courts to do whar
Congress would not i'',-S3a
President Taft in his Special messar.
10 congress of January 7, 1910. ureintr
a Federal incorporation act. declared
mat TO put the word "reasona Bile" in
10 the anti-trust statute, and TINS
leave Il for the courts to say what wa. &.
reasonable restraint OF trade, would
he TO put into the hands of the courts
I u power impossible TO exercise on any
consistent principle which would IN.
sure the uniformity OF decision essen
tlal to good Judgment" e
TT is to throw upon the courte ~
added. "a burden that they have no F
precedents to enable them to carry ana
10 give them q power approaching tile y
arbitrary, the abuse OF which mfeht
involve our judicial system In disas-
ter" - H"iS'..
Views OF President.
AS to the doctrine of good trust.n
and bad trusts, which the majority
opinion OF the court. as EXPRESSED nv q
Chief Justice White, seems to hava
laid down, President TAFT in his mes
sage written more than year ago
said. -
Tho public and especilly the busi-
ness public. ought to rid themselves
OF The idea that such distinction IS
practicable or can be introduced into 3
the statute. Certainly under the pres
ent antitrust law. no such distinction
exists i1i4
RELYING upon the former opinions or
the supreme Court in the so-calied
trans Missouri and Joint traffic cases h
the President said:
The Supreme Court in several OF ,ts
decisions has declined TO read into Inc
Statute tho word 'unrea sonablt' he
Tore restraint of trade on the ground
That the statute applies to all re-
straints and does not intend to leave
to the court the discretion 10 deter
mine what is Il reasonable restraint OF
trade, E
The apparent reversal in the stan
dard OIL case OF tho courts decisions
on these former occasions formed tho
basis of much of the discussion and
speculation INDUCED In here to- day. 4
Although the Presidents Ideas MS 10
the rule o treason" seem to be diver
gent from those of the majority opin-
lon and TO coincide more closely with
Mr.. Taft was quoted by callers to-day =
as saying:
II defer to the decision OF the SUI
preme Court: am willing to take my.
law from IT."
stituthte'- fpreGersounCfb taoin shrd3 y
H Generally speaking. Democratic Sen d
ators and Representatives to-day
frankly expressed their disappoint- 9
ment as to tho rule of reason fea- |5
ture OF the decision Chairman Adams
son. or the House Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce. declared &
the Supreme Court had no consti.n- -
tonal power 10 write the words "ren-
sonable' or "unreasonabie" into tho
Sherman antitrust Law. a
VIII nc Carefully Considered. & 4
1t was reported tonight that sovcraI