The Washington times., 1911-05-19

SHERMAN LAW NOT
! TO Be AMENDED BY
RULING, SAYS LEVY
New York Representative
Finds Standard Decision Is
q. Generally Acceptable.
HAS DEMONSTRATED
ITS PUNITIVE POWER
Complaint That Liberties Have
Been Betrayed Denounced
"a as Unreasonable.

"There is going to be no amend
ment of the Sherman law, induced by
the decision of the Standard Oil case"
declared Representative jefferson NJ.
Levy. of New York, with a good deal
of vigor today.
pr 81 have talked with leaders of the
House, on both sides, and with a
~ great many of the rank and file. and
feel fully justified in saying that the
p decision of the. Supreme Court meets
very general appreciation. True. there
are extremists who voice suspicion
that the Supreme Court has destroyed
the most important part of the law;
timent of the great majority.
''It seems to me that the press has
not fairly presented to the country
the real attitude of Congress toward
this question of the future Of the law, In
view of this decision. l am convinced
that the business interests of the
country, and the vast majority of
serious minded students of these
problems, are highly pleased first
that the long delayed decision is rem
dered and the uncertainty at an end:
and second, that the Supreme Court
has laid down the rule that has been
prescribed in this decision.
Unreasonable" Qualification.
Just about a week before the de-
cision of this case, l introduced a bill
which presented my idea of what the
American people desired. 1t proposed
to write the word unreasonable into
the statute.
IF passed, this amendment would
place in the power of juries to deter
mine, in each specific case, what COM
binat ton would be reasonable or unrea-
sonable in the particular case viewed
in the light of the circumstances sur
rounding it, the nature and effect upon
the public of the combination and the
,inducement prompting the parties to
enter 1t.
THE construction would be under the
rules of the common law, which is the
growth of centuries. The act. If amend
ed as | proposed, would be regarded as
an adoption of the common law in, re-
spect to conspiracies and restraint of
trade, and as further providing rem
edies for the punishment of such con-
spiracies and would be of very great
use in respect TO preventing the contin.
/ uance of illegal combinations and OF
Furnishing the parties thereto.
Had Same Object In View.
In short. 1 had in mind to accom-
plish by legislation exactly what the
Supreme Court has accomplished by
the construction given in the Standard
Oil case. In view of the decision OF
4, the court, there is no occasion to press
the bill which l introduced.
On the other hand. there are indica-
tions of considerable insistence on legis-
lation aimed in the diametriCally oppo-
site direction-legislation to make the
law provide specifically that the reason
ableness or unrea asonableness of any re-
straint of trade may not be considered,
but that all restraints shall be illegal.
That will be found impracricable and
impossible legislation, and it will not, in
the end. be passed. Any cumbina ton
necessarily involves some measure OF
restraint, and to denounce all combina-
tions without reference to the merits of
the particular case would project all
business and industrial enterprise into
a condition of hopeless chaos.
The law has demonstrated that II
has the breadth to reach a mischievous
combination, and to dissolve II. That
, Is a great accomplishment. Complaints
that our liberties have been betrayed
by a decision which dissolves the parent
of all modern trusts is about the most
unreasonable complaint that could we'll
be voiced. 1t comes from unpatriotc
citizens and agitatOrs who desire 10
throw the business world into chaos"