The Parma herald. (Parma, Idaho) 1903-1917, 1911-12-14
PRESIDENTS MESSAGE
DEALS WITH TRUST EVIL
Would Have a "Trust Overseer" and
o. K. for "Cood" Combinations.

WAShiNQION, Dec b.--frehloent
| Tafts mossnRe to Congress. rend y
| both houses today, WAS devoted wholly
| to tho subject OF trusts and the en-
| forcement OF antf-Honopoly laws.
4 This President begins by saying the
| message 10 one OF several he shall send
TO Congress before the Christmas holt
| days; that tho number OF important
\ subjects 10 be treated IL too large for
| one. He fhau reviews tho anti-tsuHt
! law ana the Supreme Court decisions In
| the tobacco trust cases. He says:
| This message IL the first OF several
| which l shalt send 70 Congress during
| the interval between the opening OF Its
| regular session and It's adjournment for
the Christmas holidays. The amount OF
information TO be communicated as to
| the operations OF the Government. the
| number OF important eubjects calling
4 Tor comment by the Executive. and the
| transmission 10 Congress OF exhaustive
| reports OF special commissions. make II
| Impossible TO Include In one message
| n reasonable length a discussion OF
| the topics that ought TO be brought TO
the attention of tho National LeRisla-
lure at It's first regular session.
| II has been said that the court. by
Introducing Into tho construction OF the
| statute rqmmon-law distinctions, has
emescuiatcd II. This Is obviously I'M
true. BY It's Judgment every contract
ana combination In restraint OF inter-
state trade made with the purpose or
by sitting competition. or OF establish
ing Ia whole or IN part a monopoly OF
such trade, IN condemned by the stat
ute. The most extreme critics cannot
Instance a case that ought 70 be con-
demned under the statute which In not
brought within It's terms thus con-
strued.
Court Power Iinsst~d.
The suggestion Ia also made that the
supreme Court by It's decision In the
last two cases has committed to the
court tho underlined and unlimited dis
,retion TO determine whether case OF
restraint OF trade Is within tho terms
n the statute. This is wholly untrue.
reasonable restraint OF trade at COM
mon law Is well Understood and In
clearly defined. IL does not rest in the
discretion OF tho court. 1t must be
smited 10 accomplish the purpose OF a
awful main contract to which. In or
Ter that Il shall be enforceable at all.
4 must be incidental. II II exceed the
needs OF that contract II is void.
The test of rcasonableness was never
applied by the court at common law to
contracts or combinations or conspira-
les In restraint OF trade whose pur-
pose was or whose necessary effect
would be to stifle competition. to CON
troll prices or establish monopolies. The
courts never assumed power TO say that
such contracts or combinations or con-
spiracies might be lawful IL the par
Ni'u W iHoin Wtlt ouiJ fntQtIHlt In the
use OF the power thus secured and did
not exact from the public too great and
tNorbitant prices 1t Is true that many
! theorists, and others engaged In busi-
ness violating tho statute, have hoped
that some such line could be drawn by
courts; but no court OF authority has
ever attempted It. Certainly there Il
! nothing In the decisions OF the latest
! two cases from which such dangerous
theory OF judicial discretion In enforc-
m ~ In 44H H. Il. III
sanction.
, We have been 2i years making this
! statute effective for the purposes fol-
, which II was enacted The knight
! case was discournglng and seemed t.
remit to the states the whole avail
/ able power to attack and suppress the
4 evils OF the trusts. slowly. however
the error OF that Judgment was cor
rected. and only In the last three OF
: four years has the heavy hand OF tho
law been laid upon the great Illegal
/, | combinations that have exercised such
i an absolute dominion over many OF our
Industries. Criminal prosecutions have
. been brought. and a number are pend.
a inR. but turles have felt averse to con.
victing for Jail sentences. and judges
have been most reluctant to impose
such sentences on men OF respectful,
] standing In society. whose offense hal
o been regarded as merely statutory
, stiii. as the offense becomes better
understood and the committing OF 4
2 partakes more of studied and delib
r crate defiance OF the law. we can b'
confident that juries will convict indi
viduals and that jail sentences will b,
imposed.
size of New Companies
objection was made by certain indie
: pendent tobacco companies that thii
. settlement (Tobacco Trust) was unjus
/, because II left companies with yer,
= large capital In active business, ans
I hot - n <xfA ha AZ
I fective TO put all on an equality wouis
be "A division of the capital and plan
Of the trust into small fractions II
,mount more nearly equal to that o.
each or the Independent companies
This contention results from a mis
understanding OF the antitrust Law
, and It's purpose. II Is not INTENDED
thereby TO prevent the accumulation
Of large capital In business enterprisei
| in which such combination can secure
. reduced cost OF production. sale. ans
| distribution. II Is directed agains
such an aggregation Of capital onl,
I when It's purpose Is that OF sitting o.
, competition. enhancing or controlllnl
n we shah have by the decree defeated
these purposes and restored competi'
, ton between the large units int
, | which tho capital and plant have beer
: divided. we shall have accomplished
the useful purpose of the statute.
II IL not the purpose OF the statute
to confiscate the property and capita
n the offending trusts. Methods OF
punishment by fine or imprisonment OF
, the individual offenders. by fine OF th'
' corporation or by forfeiture OF ~
a | goods In transportation. are provided
but the proceeding In equity IL speci
nc remedy to stop the operation OF tbs
G trust by Injunction and prevent tbs
: future use OF the plant and capital II
violation Of the statute.
(, venture TO say that not In tbs
> history OF American law has a decree
n more effective for such a purpose beer
! entered by court than that agains
the Tobacco Trust.
>. IL has tecn assumed that the pres
ent pro rata and common ownership
, In all these (tobacco) companies b,
former stockholders OF the trust wouls
insure a continuance Of tho same oil
single control OF all the companies Int
!. | which the trust has by decree beef
! iisintegrRted. This Is erroneous ans
IL based upon the assumed inefficac,
J. and innocuousnesS OF judicial injunc
= tons. The companies are enjoines
2. from cooperation or combination; the,
= have different managers. directors
= purchasing and sales agents. IL all o
: many OF the numerous stockholders
n reaching into the thousands, attemp
"a to secure concerted action OF the com
panles with view to the control o
n the market. their number is so iarg
that such an attempt could not well b.
| concealed and it's prtme movera an