The Washington times., 1911-05-30
THE DECISION OF THE TO-
BACCO TRUST CASE.

Much of the uncertainty which sur
rounded the Sherman acts meaning
has been cleared up by the decision
of the Supreme Court in the Tobacco
case. Mr.. Justice Harlan did real
service to the community when, in the
Standard Oil case, he delivered a
vigorous dissenting opinion. That
dissent served to spur the Court to an
elaboration, in the Tobacco case, of
its views, and a Qualification of their
expression, which give even the lay
reader a much more adequate idea OF
the limitations hereafter TO be placed
on the operations of great combina-
tions and aggregations.
1t is perfectly clear now that the
Supreme Court is going to do whatever
is in it's power to maintain COM
petition as the prime condition OF
trade. This will satisfy the vast ma
jority of people. 1t will displease those
extreme thinkers of communistic ten
dency, who believe competition is an
uneconomic and ultimately undesirable
condition, and who, like the academic
socialists, bless the trusts because they
account the trusts the guarantors of
ultimate destruction of the competi-
tive system.
In taking this view the Court ac-
cepts the policy laid down for it by
Congress. Congress is the one au-
thority vested with the determination
of such questions of public policy. In
passing the Sherman act, and in re-
peatedly declining since to amend it,
Congress has given earnest of its de-
votion to this view of proper public
policy toward monopolistic Naggre
cations. The Standard Oil opinion,
supplemented by that in the Tobacco
case, assures that this plan is to be
given a trial as thorough and long
continuing as Congress may deem
wise in view of results.
A few months ago there was gen.
eral conviction that the Government
would win the Standard Oil case, but
a considerable body of authority an
ticipated that it would lose the To-
bacco case. Instead, the Government
wins the Tobacco case with an even
more emphatic verdict than was handed
down in the Oil case.
Reading the Tobacco case in the
light of former decisions, it is now
possible with some confidence to pre-
dict the fate of other combinations
which exert preponderating influence
in various industrial fields. There can
be little doubt that the Court will de-
eide, for instance, that the Sugar
trust and the "Bath-tub trust" must
be dissolved. Their character and
methods bring them within the con-
struction to the law in the two re-
Gently decided cases.
There is still left, however, the de-
termination of methods by which
these great combinations shall be dis
integrated. The instructions with
which the Tobacco case is sent back
to the lower court are specific as to
results to be achieved. There must be
literal and complete disintegration,
which will restore competitive con-
ditions.
Discussion of the history of the To-
bacco trust, by the Court, develops the
evidence of purpose to decide these
cases in the light of the facts as to
intent to monopolize. The Supreme
Court goes farther even than did the
Circuit Court of Appeals in insisting
on the complete disintegration of the
combination, and the creation of a
new condition not repugnant to the
law.
These two decisions probably fix for
a generation the Sherman law plan
as this nations policy toward COM
binations. Business is going to be
given ample opportunity to readjust
itself to new conditions. In neither
case is there reason to believe that
great difficulty will be experienced in
conforming to the requirements of the
Court. The business is to be pro-
tected and conserved; property rights
are to be cared for with scrupulous
concern. There is no reason to appre-
bend serious embarrassment, even of
a temporary nature, in complying
with the new requirements.