Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1911-09-19

the statute COuld De cOHstTuou 80 @
to make 1t apply only to unreasonable
and unreasonable eS
clusion of competition and control Q
prices. They had in their minds tn
that in some way or other !
standard could be set by WITCH ]
those who enjoyed the monopoly an
the restraint of competition and tn
control Of prices did not abuse thei
power to the point Of seeking iron
the public exorbitant profits, their al
could be held to be onl
reasonable and not within the statut
or punishable by law. In my messag
Of january 7, 1910. on the interstate
and antitrust laws and fec
eral incorporation, used thi
language:
Many people conducting great
!: business have cherished a hope
and belief that In some way or
other 4 line may be drawn be-
tween good trusts" and "bad
trusts" and that It ls possible by
amendment to the antitrust law
to make q distinction under which
good combinations may be per.
United to organize, suppress COM
( petition, control prices, and do It
all legally II only they do not
abuse the power by taking too
great profit out Of the business.
They point with force to certain
notorious trusts as having grown
into power through criminal
methods by the use Of illegal re-
bates and plain cheating, and by
various acts utterly vlolatIve OF
business honesty or morality, and
urge the establishment Of some
legal line or separation by which
terminal trusts" Of this kind can
be punished, and they, on the
other hand, be permitted under
the law, to carry on their busi-
ness. Now the public, and espe-
cIaIly the business public, ought
to rid themselves Of the Idea that
such 4 distinction is practicable
or can be introduced into the
statute. Certainly under the prss-
ent antitrust law no such dIstlnc-
ton exists. II has been proposed,
however, that the word treason
able" should be made part Of
the statute, and then It should be
lef< to the court to say what
Is reasonable restraint Of
trade, what Is a reason
able suppression OF competition,
what Is reasonable monopoly.
venture to think that this Is to
put into the hands Of the court a
power Impossible to exercise on
any consistent principle which
Will Insure the uniformity Of de-
cislon essential to Just judgment.
1t Is to thrust upon the courts
burden that they have no prece-
dents to enable them to carry,
and to give them a power ap-
preaching the arbitrary, the
abuse Of which might Involve our
whole judicial system In disaster.
This paragraph has been Quilted ant
spread on the record Of the senate or
he motion of a senator who consid
cred this to be at variance with the
decisions Of the supreme court. II
stead of being at variance, It IS II
exact accord with those decisions.
Courts Remedy Held Adequate.
Again, from those who have give1
Up free competition as an economic
orce that ought to be encouraged Of
and who are utterly op
,osed to. the spirit Of the antitrus
aw. we have frequently heard tn
question, well, suppose you con
'ict those large combinations unde
he statute, what are you going t.
10 about 1t? You can, perhaps, sent
Iome men to the penitentiary TO
,reating these combinations which
rave cheapened the cost Of production
ind given you most Of your foreign
rade and much of your prosperity
,ut what are you going to do will
he capital invested. the plant, ant
he organization? You can confscat,
Il and ruin your country by a panic
but you can't divide such combina
.ione into their component parts
again, for the lines Of division hav'
into a common owner
ship"
The court has met the issue ant
he queries presented by the doubter'
and the scoffers. It has vindicatet
The majesty of the law. has illustrated
he wonderful elasticity and adapt
ability of remedy by injunction IL
equity, and has at the same tim,
manifested due regard for the vel
ARE of the innocent business men ant
he community at large, who, in ,
caused by the confiscatiol
II such enormous capital as are in
volved In these combinations and ,
of the legitimate part O
heir business. would be buried will
hen. in a common ruin.
Business Must Abide by Decisions.
The court has exhibited a courage IL
acing the necessary results in en-
orcing the statute that, instead O
an attack on it, ought tt
make every American proud that W.
rave such tribunal 1t Is now en-
orcing it's decree against the Stand
lrd Oil Co., and against the Tobacco
Co., and it is making those great com
oinations divide themselves into &C
ually competing parts under sucf
in the decree that an in
JUNCTION shall be constantly operative
o prevent by contempt proceeding:
my assumption Of the old relation:
# monopoly. This was an easier
natter in reference to the STANDARD
jill Co., because 1t was easy to divide
Up the various companies that were
United by the ownership of stock of al
he companies in single holding