The Julesburg grit-advocate., 1911-12-14

in ownership OF the stock. as all on
portunity for continued cooperation
must disappear. Those critics who
speak Of this disintesration In the trust
as a mere change Of garments have not
given consideration to the inevita BILE
working Of the decree and understa nd
little the personal danger Of attempt
ing to evade or set at nausht the sol
emn injunction of court whose object
is made plain by the decree and whose
are set forth with n detail
and comprehensivenessu unexampled in
the history of equity Jurisprudence.
Voluntary Reorganization Of Other
Trusts st Hand.
The effect of these two decisions has
led to DEGREES dissolvinS the combina-
ton of manufacturers of electric
lamps. southern wholesale srocers'
an interlocutory decree
against the powder trust. with direc-
tions by the circuit court compelling
and other combinations of
n similar history are now negotiating
with the department OF Justice looking
to disintegration by decree and re
organization in accordance with law
1t seems possible TO bring about these
organizations without general bust
less disturbance
Movement For Repeal Of the Anti
trust Law.
But now that the antitrust act is
seen to be effective for the accomplish
ment Of the purpose Of Its enactment
we are met by Il cry from many differ
ent quarters for its repeal. 1t is said
to be obstructive OF business progress.
to be nm attempt to restore old fash
ioned methods Of destructive competi-
ton between small units and to make
impossible those useful combinations
of capital and the reduction of the cost
of production that are essential to con-
tinued prosperity and normal growth.
In the recent decisions the supreme
court makes clear that there is moth
Ing in the statute which condemns
combinations Of capital or mere big
ness of plant organized to secure econ
omy in production and reduction of
its cost. 1t is only when the purpose
or necessary effect OF the organization
and maintenance Of the combination
Or the aggregation Of immense size are
tile sitting of competition. actual and
potential. and the enhancin: Of prices
and establishing II monopoly that the
statute is violated. Mere size is no
sin against the law The merging OF
two or more business plants necessari-
iy eliminates competition between the
units thus combined. but this eliminn.
tion is in contravention Of the statute
only when the combination ia made for
purpose of ending this particular COM
petition in order to secure control Of
and enhance prices and create mo.
nopOly.
Lack Of Dsfinitsnsss In the Statute.
The complaint Is made of the stat
ute that 1t IL not sufficiently definite
in its description Of that which is for
bidden to enable business men to avoid
its violation. The suggestion is tina.
We may have combination OF two
corporations which may run on for
years and that subsequently the at
torncy general may conclude that it
was violation of the statute and that
which was supposed by the combirers
to bc innocent then turns out to be n
combination In violation of the statute
The answer TO this hypothetical case
is that when men attempt to amass
such stupendous capital rs will enable
them to suppress competition. control
prices and establish a monopoly they
know the purpose OF their acts. Men
do not do such a thing without having
it clearly In mind. If what they do Is
merely for the purpose of reducing the
cost OF production, without the thought
OF suppressins competition by use of the
bisness OF the plant they are creating.
then they cannot be convicted at the
time tho union is made. nor can they
be convicted later unless 1t happen
that later on they conclude to sup
press competition and take the usual
methods for doing so and thus estab-
lish for themselves monopoly. They
can in such case hardly complain II
the motive which subsequently is dis
closed is attributed by the court to the
original combination.
New Remedies Suggested.
Much is said Of the repeal Of this
statute and Of constructive legislation
intended to accomplish the purpose
and blaze Il clear path for honest mcr.
chants and business men To follow 1t
may l,c.- that such plan will be
evolved. but ] submit that the discus.
sions which have been brought out In
recent days by the fear Of the con-
tinucd execution of the antitrust law
have produced nothing but Slittcring
gcncralit!es and have offered no line
of distinction or rule Of action MS def
mite and AZ clear as that which the su.
prere court itself lays down in en-
forcing the statute.
Supplemental Legislation Nesdsd. Not
Repeal or Amendment.
see no objection. and indeed I can