Norwich bulletin., 1911-12-06

must be incidental. If it exceed the
 neess of that contract it is void.
 The test of reasona bleness was never
 applied by the court at comman law l to contracts or combinations or con
 spiracies in restraint of trade whose purpose was or whose necessary effect 1 would be to stihe competition. to con | trol prices or establish monopOlies. The courts never assumed power to ] say that such contracts or cOmbina- ! tions or conspiracies might be lawful ] if the parties to them were only mod 1 crate in Ene use of the power thus sc 1 cured and did not exact from the pub | lie too great and exorbitant prices It 1 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 dangerous theory of ju- dicial discretion in enforcing this stat
 ute can derive the slightest sanction.
 Force and Effectiveness of Statute a Matter of Growth.
 We nave DecH LWSuty -OuC years 11ah-
 ing this statute effective for the pur-
 poses for which it was enacted. The
 Knight case was discourag1ng and
 seemed to remit to the states the whole
 available power to attack and suppress
 the evils of the trusts. Slowly, howev-
 CT, the error of that judgment was cor
 rected, and only in the last three OF
 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 a 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 un- derstood and the committing of 1t par takes more of studied and deliberate
 defiance Of the law we can be conf dent that juries will convict individu-
 als and that jail sentences will be i'm
 posed.
 The Remedy In Eqdity 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
 mark citing petroleum and its products, effected and maintained through thir- ty-seven different corpora tioRs, the stock of which was held by a New ter sey company It in effect commanded the dissolution of this combination, di- tH iSfF button by the New Jersey company of the Stock held by it fin the thirty-seven corporations to and among it's 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. twen- ty-nine in number, had been engaged in 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 a purpose and effect to stif1e competi- ton, control prices and establish 8 not only in the manufacture of tobacco, but also of tin foil and ic- orice used in its manufacture and of it's products of cigars. cigarettes and snuffs. The tobacco suit presented a far more complicated and difficult case than the Standard Oil suit for a decree which would effectuate the will of the court and end the violation of the stat 1 ute. There was here no single hold 1 ing company, as in the case of the | Standard Oil trust The main company | was the American Tobacco company, | a manufacturing, selling and holding | company. The plan adopted to de ! stroy the combination and restore com petition involved the redivision of the | ,a pital and plants of the whole trust | between some of the companies con the trust and new companies | organized for the purposes of the de- rec and made parties to 1t and num- oering. new and old, fourteen.
 Situation After Road djustnent.
 The American Tobacco company -oldl. read3usted capital sa2, 600, GOO: he Iiggett & Meyers Tobacco company new. capital $eT, GOO, 900: the P. Loril- ard company tnew1 capital Sz7 7.00o,- DO. and the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco company (oldD. capital S7.5c5.ooO. are .hiehy engaged In the manufacture md sale of chewing and smoking to- ,acco ands cigarA The. former one tin oil companysiss divided Stnto two.s one ,f ss250oo capital and Tthe other of AGO. GOO. , The ones snuff company is lfvided into. .three oopapanfeaEcne with l capital of s1n.oo0ooo. anothM with a apital of $S,0oo,oco and a thirdeEith capital. of 4A00o, GOO. 4 The Iicor.ce are two, one wiihsa capital f &5. .76a. 300 and another with A. capi- al of x,ono.eoo rhere Is also the Tobacco eomparry, a sritt&h s eorpsfsticn. doiag business brseAAwtkh. a nnpitsl of SeA1uA. GOO. ne z IeHHfn .s a7ca H=-.E ehacexa ed4s14aaztw.