The Raymer enterprise., 1911-12-07
DEFENDS DECISIONS OF COURT
an Cases Of Standard Oil and
Tobacco Companies.
THINKS AMENDMENTS NEEDED
Believes Present Statutes Good as Far
as They Go but Suggests Supple.
mental legisIation-For Fed
eral Corporation Law.

Washington. Dec. 5.-Presldent
ITaits annual message. which was read
in both houses OF congress today, deals
exclusively with the antitrust statute.
The full text OF the message Is as fol.
lows:
To the Senate and House OF Repre-.
Isentatives: This message is the first
Iof several which | shall send to con.
gress during the interval between the
Opening OF It's regular session and Its
adjournment for the Christmas holi.
days. The amount OF information to be
communicated as to the operations OF
hhe government, the number OF impor.
tant subjects calling for comment by
the executive, and the transmission TO
congress OF exhaustive reports by spe.
cial commissions. make 1t impossible
TO include In one message OF reason.
able length 4 discussion OF the topics
that ought to be brought to the atten.
zion OF the national legislature at It's
first regular session.
The Antitrust Law-The Supreme
Court Decisions.
In May last the Supreme court hand.
ed down decisions In the suits In
equity brought by the United States to
cnjoin the further maintenance OF the
Standard OH trust and OF the Ameri.
can Tobacco trust, and to secure their
dissolution. The decisions are epoch.
making and serve to advise the busi.
nsss world authoritatlvely OF the scope
and operation OF the antitrust act OF
1890 The decisions do not depart In
any substantial way from the previous
decisions OF the court In constituting
and applying this important statute
but they clarity those important deci
sions by further defining the already
admitted exceptions to the literal con
strnction OF the act BY the decrees
they furnish a useful precedent as to
The proper method OF dealing with the
capital and property OF illegal trusts
These decisions suggest the need and
wisdom OF additional or supplemental
legislation to make II easier for the
entire business community to square
with the rule OF action and legality
thus finally established and to preserve
the benefit. freedom and spur OF rea
sonable competition without loss OF
real efficiency or progress.
No Change In tho Rule Of Decision
Merely In Its Form Of Expression.
The statute In It's first section de,
clares to be Illegal every contract
combination In the form OF trust or
otherwise. or conspiracy. In restrain,
OF trade or commerce among the sew
eral states or with foreign nations,
and In the second. declares guilty Of a
misdcmeanor every person who shal
monopolizc or attempt to monopolize
or combine or conspirc with any othe,
person to monopollze any part OF the
trade or commerce OF the several
states or with foreign nations"
In two early cases. where the statute
was invoked to enjoin n transportation
agreement between Interstate railroad
companies. It was held that II was ne
defense to show that the agreement a,
to rates complained OF was reasonn
at common law. because II was sale
that the statute was directed agains
all contracts and combinations In re
straint OF trade whether reasonal nj
common law or not II was plain from
the record. however. that the contract.
complained OF In those cases woult
not have been deemed reasonable a
common law, In subsequent cases th,
court said that the statute should b,
given rcasonal construction and re
fused to Include within Its inhibition
certain contractual restraints OF trad,
which II dominated as Incidental or al
Indirect
These cases OF restraint OF trade tina
the court excepted from the operation
OF the statute were instances which. a
common law. would have been called
reasonable In the Standard OIL an,
Tobacco cases. therefore, the cour
merely adopted the tests Of the com
mon law. and In defining exceptions I,
the literal application OF the statute
only substituted for the test OF beIn,
incidental or indirect, that OF bcln,
reasonable and this. without varyinJ
In the slightest the actual scope ant
effect OF the statute In other words
Du The cases under the statute which
have now been decided would hav,
been decided the same way II tho cour
Ind originally accepted In its construc
tIon the rule at common law
Il has been said that the court, b.
introducing ipto the construction q