Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-05-17
FULL TEXT OF JUSTICE HAIR.
lAN'S DISSENTING OPINION.
Would Dissolve the Trust but Thinks Court
Has No Right to Write into the Statute
Differentiation of Reasonable"
and Unreasonable. y
JUSTICE HARLAN's OPINION.

| Washington, MAJ 16.-GOvernmental
| Washington in all its branches-legis-
| lative, executive and judicial-gave
| over tie greater part of today to
| a discussion of The supreme courts
| disposition of the Standard Oil case.
| While there was much qualification in
| administration circles over the order
| for the dissolution of the giant cor
| poration which had been declared "An
| unreasonable" com bination and mo-
| nopcly in restraint of trade, there
| unquestionabiy was also some mis-
| giving as to the Interpretation of the
/ antitrust law giving to courts the
right to determine whether or not
monopoly vas Reasonable" and de-
| claring a Reasonable monopoly not
| to he in contravention of the statute.
President Taft. who little more
| than a year ago. ii n special message
| to Congress, declared that under su-
| preme court precedents, there could
| be no such thing as Reasonable
| and Unreasonable restraints of
| trade. or in other words Good trusts
/ and Bad trusts" was said today to
have been rather keenly disappointed
that the court should nave seen fit to
reverse itself in this important mat
| ter.
President Taft's message was freely
| quoted about the Capitol today, the
| seeming similarity of his views as to
| the scope of the antitrust law to the
| view expressed by Associate Justice
| Harlan in his dissenting opinion of
! yesterday, attracted renewed attention
| to Justice Harlan's position as outln-
| ed in his statement to the court fol-
| lowing the handing down of the ma
| jority opinion by Chief Justice White.
Justice Harlan held that his brother
judges had no right to usurp the func-
| ton of the legislative branch of the
government by writing into the statute
a differentiation between Reasonable"
| ard Unreasonable" He declared that
| Congress had resisted all appeals to
So amend the act and that they could
never be put through the legislative
branch. Under these circumstances and
in their extremity. great aggregations
of wealth applied to the court in an eff
fort to have it construe the law in
way that would be a flat reversal of
what it had held on two previous occa
sioBs
/
ty to such reversal and hence his dis
senting opinion. He denounced as "the
most alarming tendency of the day
the tendency to judicial legislation.
| Men of power. he said. always were
! trying to get the courts to do what
Congress would not,
The apparent reversal in the Stand
ard Oil case of the courts decisions
on former occasions formed the basis
of much of the discussion and specula :
ton INDUCED in here today. Although
the Presidents ideas as to the "ruie OF
reason" seem to be divergent from
those of the majority opinion and to
coincide more closely with the dissent
ing views of Justice Harlan. Mr.. Taft
!; was quoted by callers today as say
ing:
Il refer to the decision of the SUI
preme court; / am willing to take my
law from it."
/; Generally speaking Democratic sem
: ators and representatives today frank
~ expressed their disappointment as to
the rule of reason" feature of the de-
cision.
1t was reported tonight that several
Democrats are ready to ofter amend
ments to nullify the courts interpreta-
ton of the law, but the matter I'M
questionably will be carefully consid
} cred before any action is taken.
/, Representative Mann. Republican
. leader of the House gave the decision
, his hearty endorsement.
The Standard Oil decision occupied
the cabinet almost exclusively at to.
days session and President Taft, hav-
!, ing read it over twice. also discussed
its purport with some of his callers
The attitude of the President himself
that he should defer to the supreme
court and accept their law as his law
J was reflected by the cabinet. What
ever their opinions might be, none OF
them was willing to admit that the de-
cision was displeasing. There is a
disposition among cabinet members to
await the decision of the supreme court
in the tobacco case. That decision is
expected May 80 and until then no
policy will be outlined by the admins
/ Continued on Page Twelre.) a,,,-