Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1911-12-06

instance n case that ought to be con-
demned under the statute which is not
brought within it's terms as thus con-
strued
The suggestion Is also made that the
supreme court by it's decision in the
last two cases has committed to the
court the underlined and unlimited dis
erection to determine whether u case Of
restraint OF trade Is within the terms
Of the statute. This is wholly untrue.
A reasonable restraint Of trade at COM
mon law is well understood and is
clearly defined 1t does not rest in the
discretion Of the court 1t must be
limited to accomplish the purpose of
lawful main contract to which in orde.
that it shall be enforceable at all it
must be Incidental. If it exceed the
needs Of that contract 1t Is void
The test of reasonabeness was never
applied by the court at comman law
to contracts or combinations or con-
spiracieS in restraint of trade whose
purpose was or whose necessary effect
would be to stifle competition. to con.
troll prices or establish monopolies.
The courts never assumed power to
say that such contracts or eombina-
tons or conspiracies might be lawful
if the parties to them were only mod
crate in the use Of the power thus Sc
cured and did not exact from the pub
lie too great and exorbitant prices. 1t
is true that many theorists and Others
engaged in business violating the stat
ute have hoped that some such line
could be drawn by courts, but no court
of authority has ever attempted it
Certainly there Is nothing in the deci-
sions of the latest two cases from
which such a dangerous theory of ju-
dicial discretion in enforcing this stat
ute can derive the slightest sanction
Force and Effectiveness Of Statute
Matter of Growth.
We have been twenty-one years max
ing this statute effective for the pur-
poses for which it was enacted. The
knight case was discouraging and
seemed to remit to the states the whole
available power to attack and suppress
the evils of the trusts. Slowly, howev.
er. the error of that judgment was cor
rected, and only in the last three or
four years has the heavy hand Of the
law been laid upon the great Illegal
combinations that have exercised such
an absolute dominion over many of our
industries Criminal prosecutions have
been brought, and number are pend.
ing. but juries have felt averse to con-
victing for Jail sentences and judges
have been most reluctant to impose
such sentences on men of respectable
standing in society whose offense has
been regarded as merely statutory.
Still. as the offense becomes better I'M
derstood and the committing Of it par
takes more of studied and deliberate
defiance of the law we can be conf
dent that juries will convict individu.
ais and that jail sentences will be i'm.
posed.
The Remedy In Equity by Dissolution.
In the Standard Oil case the supreme
and circuit courts found the combina.
ton to be monopoly Of the interstate
business Of refining. transporting and
marketing petroleum and its products.
effected and maintained through thir-
ty-seven different corporations. the
stock of which was held by a New Jer-
sey company. 1t in effect commanded
the dissolution of this combination, di-
rected the transfer and pro rata distri-
button by the New Jersey company or
the stock held by it in the thirty seven
corporations to and among its stock
holders. and the corporations and indi-
vidual defendants were enjoined from
conspiring or combining to restore
such monopoly, and all agreements be-
tween the subsidiary corporations tend
ing to produce or bring about further
violations of the act were enjoined.
In the tobacco case the court found
that the individual defendants. TWEEN
ty-nine in number. had been engaged
in a successful effort to acquire COM
plete dominion over the manufacture,
sale and distribution of tobacco in this
country and abroad and that this had
been done by combinations made with
q purpose and effect to stifle competi-
monopoly. not only in the manufacture
of tobacco. but also of tin foil and lic-
orice used I. its manufacture and OF
its products of cigars. cigarettes and
snuffs. The tobacco suit presented a
far more complicated and difficult case
than the Standard Oil suit for decree
which would effectuate the will of the
court and end the violation Of the stat
ute. There was here no single hold
| ing company, as in the case OF the
| Standard Oil trust The main company
was the American Tobacco company.
q manufacturing, selling and holding
company. The plan adopted to de-
stroy the combination and restore COM
petition involved the redivision OF the
capital and plants of the whole trust
between some of the companies con
shutting the trust and new companies
organized for the purposes of the de-
cree and made parties TO 1t and mum
boring. new and old. fourteen.
Situation After Readiustment.
The American Tobacco company
(old), readiusted capital 500 100000;
the Liggett & Meyers Tobacco company
new, capital SCI 100000; the p. Loril.
lard company new, capital $4,000
600. and the r. j. Reynolds Tobacco
company (old), capital $1,525,OOO. are
chiefly engaged in the manufacture