The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1911-07-06
KNEW OF WRECKING;
REFUSED To ACT

WASHINGTON, D. c. Special
Further charges that President Roose-
welt and Attorney General Bonaparte
knew of the wrecking of the Real Es-
tate Trust Company, Of Philadelphia,
by the American Sugar Refining Com
pany, through it's deal for the Penn
syivania Sugar Company, and that
Roosevelt and BOnaparte persistently
refused to act against the Sugar Trust.
were made today when George II.
Earle, Jr., resumed his testimony be-
fore the House Sugar Investigating
Committee.
Mr.. Earle, who was receiver for the
Real Estate Trust Company. declared
that he had laid all the facts before
Roosevelt and Bonaparte in 1906 and
that he wrote the President that here
was big game"
Mr.. Roosevelt had lost his fondness
Tor big game" the witness added,
when he finished reading this portion
OF the letter into the record.
Mr.. Earle said that he had come to
the eoGn1 S that the Real Estate
the sugar rate war between the Ameri-
can Sugar Company and the Pennsyl-
The Real Estate Trust Company own
ed much Of the latters stock.
cuu9n against the sugar trust was
ruled out by the Knight case, and he
sent me a brief OF the case"
Mr. Roosevelt refused to look at my
Il made appeals. through letters to
reached him. When 1 first laid my cdse
before Mr.. Purdy, of the Department
That is the very thing we have
Heen III wanting. We will put the ---
But no action was ever ordered by
In April, 1907. went on my own
sugar trust in the Southern District OF
New York. l lost on, a demurrer, ap-
was on trial IL was settled"
used TO think Theodore Roose-
Velt the greatest man in the universe
and the people of Kansas still do" he
said.
Mr.. Earle said he had but one con-
versation with Mr.. Roosevelt in many
years.
Have you ever been prosecuted be-
cause OF your antipathy to the sugar
trust?" asked Representative Madison.
Not at ALL" said Earle.
Discusses Supreme Court.
Inc witness then jumped to a dis
cusslon OF the Sherman law and the
recent supreme Court decisions
Il have my suspicion of anyone who
would change the Sherman law" said
Mr.. Earle. 1T is the best tested law
In the world and dates back to the
time OF Nero
Mr.. Earle reviewed the decision g.,
the Knight case. the Northern Securi-
ties case and the Trans Missouri cases
Mr.. Justice White in his recent
ueclslons, was right in saying that re-
straint OF trade is indefinite in the
act Mr.. Justice Whites decision was
only a dictum. He said you can re-
strain trade, but not make ii unduly
less.
Il rather disagree with this latter
Interpretation that you can make less
trade, but must not undulY reduce it,
How am TO know that my restraint
Will not be regarded as undue by
four or five others not in my BUSH
ness? Mr.. Justice White might not
have made this distinction had the
matter been fully argued. The whole
trouble originated in the TRANSMITS
souri, case because the court assumed
the common law and did not examine
IL. The court says you can cut down
general trade, provided you don't do
1t too much 1t is the too much
that Will cause trouble. The common
law never recognized any restraint
that works for private gain to the in
jury of the public welfare Restraint
is unlawful if ii hurts the public at
all, and ! think the introduction of
the word undue was most unhappV
The decision of the court it seems
TO me, reserves to the court. not the
duty OF determining whether there is
restraint, but rather the right of leg
lSIatlVe power to say whether restraint
is excessive. Congress has said that
any restraint is wrong. If YOU don't
mean that you ought to change the
law. | think you are drawing a stat
ute pretty high when you say a man
nn6uIu ~