New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-05-26
AlR|A AN SEES TROUBLE
N OIL DECISION
lustice in Formal Dissenting
ouinion in Standard Case
CriticiSeS His Colleagues.
oIIOTES TAFT IN HIS SUPPORT
savs the Supreme Court, Instead
Of Giving Rest to Business by
Its Ruling, His Invited
Harassing Legislation.

Washington. Nav 25.-Associate Jus
.,s rohn Marshall Harlan filed in the
s,n-eme Court to-day his formal dis
,.,,ing opinion in the Standard Oil suit
r,stice Hsrlans oral criticism of the
.ourt for holding that only unreasonable
=, undue restraints on trade are in vio-
,,ron or the law furnished the outline
g. ,o-davs hroadside against the opin-
i,r of the majority Of the court He
,sn, further. however. and criticised
n. court for modifying the decree Of
.,s lowcr court 50 as n permit the sub
,,s;.rv companies 10 enter into agree
,.s,,s among themselves. and expressed
conviction that instead of the opinion
,,,,nr ouiet and rest to the business Of
ss country II would throw business into
Infusion and invite widely extended
,,d hsrassing litigation. the injurious
.~se,s Of which will be felt for many
ytars 70 come.
Ever since the case was decided, on
MAY Il Justice Harlan has been pre-
..ring his dissenting opinion, and II was
-, comrlete until to-day. one Of the
-, changes made II y said was to
l,.tr, quotation from the decision OF
1.ssa Taft now President Taft. in the
,sdvston Pine case. in which Judge TAFT
,.id that according 10 the decision OF the
e,,,sn,A Court all restraints. whether
,.os,rable or unreasonable under the
,ommon law. were forbidden by the
statute.
Calls Majority Opinion MischleVous.
Justice Harlan entirely rewrote the
,,sroTraphic report Of his remarks from
-. hArch The oral dissent formed
rs-4lv framework for the fnal docu-
nsrt containing about eight thousand
words. which was put on record to-day
Justice Harlan brands as mischievous
re modification made by the court in
tbs decree Of the lower court permitting
subsidiary corporations Of the Standard
Oh after dissolution of the combination
10 make normal and lawful agreement
among themselves Chief Justice White
had characterized this modification as a
minor matter" The justice adds.
The disposition Of the case under con
s.deratiOn according 70 the views or the
Attendants. will Y IS claimed. quiet and
give rest 70 the business Of the country
On the contrary. ] have strong ccnNc-
t,on that IL viii throw the business of the
Corrfrv into c0ntrsiCn and invite WioeN
extended and hsrssslng litigation me m
rsrv wears 20 come When Congress pro
hoited every contract. combination or mo
nopcv n restraint OF commerce u pre-
s,rioed simple definite rule that al could
understand and could be easily apphed oy
everv one WISHING 70 obey the law and not
70 conduct their business in violation or
aw
But now it IS 20 be feared. ve. are 70
tsvs N csses without number. the con
ganty recurring inquiry-dittlcul 10 solNe
tr proof-wheth-r the particular contract.
conb.nsuol o. trust involved in each case
kor is not an unreasonable or undue
restraint of trade
i9ngrsss in erect said that there should
tsnO restraint y trade IN any form. ana
his court solemnly 2dIudged many Years
ago that Congress meant what " tnuS Salo
Y dear end explicit words. ana tnat
eogh not add 10 the words Of the act
B-t those who condemn the action Of CON
gsss are now. IN effect. Informed thdt me
tol,ts will allow such restraints Of inter
tsie commerce as are SnoWn not 10 be
unreasonable or undue
Il does not necessarily follow that be
,;gss an illegal restraint Of trade or an
t,isfapt 70 r,0ropoHze or monopOliZaton
fssuliei from the combination and the
transfer Of stocks of the subsidiary corpor
toIs 70 the New Jersey corporation that
Ike restraint or attempt 70 mOnopollZe
q mor0polZation would necessarily arse
ron agreement between one or more or
ht SUBSIDIARY corporations after the trans
it Of tre stock by the New Jersey corpor-
a'0r