New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-15
SHERMAN ACT SUBSTITUTE
,,doc Grosscup Has Remedy for
'''' ILLEGAL Monopolles.

~..,, iowa June A-beCldiihs 'h"
Iow' c, "even as now interpreted an
sheIhi'a,r remedy IN the Just complaint OF
peheo,,.orv man against monopolies,
BE o' go 6 Grosscur, Of the United
rase ,-,rcu,t Court OF Appeals. proposed
sts'e' announcement address before the
- 'ne ~ Iowa to-day a new method
ssalins with trusts
,ecoenze combination and monopoly
ling necessarily here square the
Tho fact. and then. as a condition 10
y" corporate power at all. reserve
frsnus, ~ regulate dividends" IL the
ne -, nudge Grosscup advances. Judge
I EN- reviewing the Sherman law.
sid:
- tn-,,an antitrust act was believed to
ne arssnon in the hands Of the men who
r~asned 10 constitute tie administration
Nfr-ashington. 10 destroy such speciuc
81 na,l;es and combinations as the ad-
rcnoil,a,ion chose to consider hurtful TO
rshsot,tion in enterprise. Instead, the
ecnlsr act became a sunken mine. over
sa..b nearly every form OF enterprise had
ssil-the fuse that would set 1t OH or
70 ~ =. harmless running direct TO the Of
NJ the Attorney General at Washing
tss,, will biz business, with no restraint
n ~, over II other than the sherman
sf % Win one of these big business en-
fu.ains caught now and then employing
ts'Flssohihited accessory methods and or
tF N reha hilitste. - the Standard Oil
q. Tohacco combinations have been. or
sNa "a rebahilitate. prevent others from
GRE their chances along the same lines
oHsn ns,, taking chances along other lines?
p.vertinr to his remedy. the Judge con-
tnusd
%. "a which government, the national
~ ihe state shall be given the power 70
e.,iv me remedy? Ny answer Is. that. IN
Hp E ~ the big so-called trusts, such.
~ ,,s,snce. As the packers or the Stand
", ali Company. the bulk OF whose raw
n,s-isl Is drawn from states other than
- company's domicile, or the bulk OF
ttsa Snished product is sold In states
',,.r than the company's domicile. thereby
Cling their business into interstate COM
,.s fbe principle l am urging should he
a,rfed ny the national goVernment.
t,ouch such processes as VIII make ~
....,i,allv compelling that enterprises or
a;s kind organize as corporations under
~ United States laws
y. maj extent at least, I am for the new
,,.,onslism. BY the hand or single
srTsreignty. and that me supreme soy,
- bo effectively applied TO the big So
n.rs6 trusts. But this does not mean that
,ss smaller manufacturing and trading cor
,o-etlons IN any given field Of enterprise
toaid he nationally incorporated. From
.sses arises no monopoly. And where.
.,orr these smaller concerns, comblna-
aors arise I'm unreasonable restraint of
,-s5s The sherman act as now interpreted
,ro,,,d nr0bsbly he sufficient.
National incorporation should depend on
,te,ber the business involved is chiefly
,,,,onal or chiefly local-a feasible meas
rsS of this being the percentage Of the
rbola business that is local and the per-
's,tara that is not local: and that whether
,ts restriction as 70 dividends should apply
AZ no, should depend on whether the bust
-sss In rs special field Of enterprise. prac-
g,alv excludes effective competition or
-bether IL does not-a feasible measure Of
,is being the percentage of the whole
business of that field that is done by the
romnsny involved. In other words. If the
nm ~ the business Of the company is ma
a.r,l let the nation he the parent and
-rustor Of the corporate advantages un-
r. which Il is conducted, and if II alb
s--hs enough Of the business Of the line In
18th n is engaged 10 enable II To throw
~ effective competition let the principle
n fair dividends nc applied.