The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1911-05-30
RECENERSH|P IDEA
WILL STRENGTHEN
THE SHERMAN LAW
Department of Justice Pleas
ed With Tobacco Trust
Decision.
By JOHN SNURE.

BY JOHN SNURE.
The more officials Of the Department
Of Justice study the decision of the Su-
preme Court of the United States in the
Tobacco trust case, ordering it dissolved
in six months, the better satisfied they
are with it.
The point about the decision that
more than any other gives them acute
satisfaction is the recognition of the
principle that If necessary a receiver
may be appointed to take charge Of the
entire com animation and make a sale
Of its assets for the purpose OF giving
force and effect to the Supreme Court
decision. and carrying into being the
actual purposes of the Sherman law to
maintain competitive conditions.
Precedent for Reforms.
Not alone is this the first time the
Supreme Court has recognized the
soundness of this doctrine in connection
with the enforcement of the Sherman
law, but it Is felt by the Department Of
Justice that 1t opens a wide road for the
effective administration of that statute.
When the department first advanced the
proposition in the beginning of the at
tack on the Tobacco trust, II was widely
scofred at
Hitherto, It Is pretty generally admit
ted. the DEGREES of the Supreme Court
in Sherman law cases have not been at
tended with that success in restoring
competitive conditions that could be
wished. In some instances the Govern
ment victories have been in name only.
In the Northern Securities case, for ex-
annie II haC cinpa the decision nf
the court was returned been widely
talked that the combination of railroad
interests still existed, though in changed
circumstances.
Such has been the barrenness Of re-
suits of Sherman law decisions in the
cuseS of some of the big combinations
that there has been serious agitation in
Congress Of the question of additional
legislation to give effect to decisions In
such cases as that OF the Tobacco trust.
Federal Price Regulation.
Only little while ago. Representative
Martin of South Dakota, a member OF
the House Committee on Interstate
Commerce, in calling attention to the
difficulty Of carrying out DEGREES in
Sherman law cases, advocated Iegisla-
ton for Government regulation OF
prices in the cases of concerns found by
the courts to be attempts to monOpOliZe
or mOnopolies. This is symptomatic or
a wide feeling that some way had to be
found tn carry out DEGREES In Sherman
law cases. not merely in letter but IN
spirit after they had been handed down.
Now, the Supreme Court recognizes
the fact that II may be advisable to
throw vas. combinations of capital into
the hands of receivers for the purpose
Of disposirG of the property and restor-
ing the constituents to competitive con-
ditions. The far-reaching effect of this
IL apparent. 1t is believed at the De-
partnent Of Justice that there are great
possibilities in this method Of dealing
with the questions raised in such cases
II is clear that II a receiver is put in
charge OF the tobacco trusts properties
there will be no undetermined restore-
ton of combination in restraint Of
trade so long as the receivership lasts.
Vital Clause of Decision.
Some of the Department of Justice
officials do not hesitate to say that
they look on the recognition Of the re-
ownership doctrine es the most vital
part of the decision. They point out
that this Will add new terrors- to the
Sherman law for violators of II, and
deter the constituents of a combination
once adjudged in restraint of trade from
seeking by indirection new monopoH-
cation.
More than this. the Department of
Justice officials derive much satisfac-
ton from the declaration of Chief JUS
tice White that the construction of the
Sherman law in the light of reason"
makes 1t impossible to Illustrate the
Sherman law policy by resorting to dis
guises or subterfuges. They are con-
WINGED that whatever may be the ulti-
mate effects of the rule Of reason
that it will be extremely difficult in any
Of the big trust prosecutions now pend
ing for combinations. shown to be &C
tually restraining trade by questionable
methods, to escape. For instance. at
ment because the Beef trust sought to
profit by the Tight of reason" con-
struction. 1t is now thought that this
construction will not avail the Beef
trust in the slightest degree, providing,
of course the lower courts do not in
terpret the light Of reason in broader
1890 thnn tha S11nrene Court does