Monroe City Democrat. (Monroe City, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1912-09-26

both sides. we went to New YORK
and took the evidence of George w.
Perkins, junior member of the bank
ing firm Of J. P. Morgan & Company.
Mr.. Perkins is the man who en-
gineered and brought about the
formation of this trust.
The International Harvester Com
pany had a capital stock of $12O, ,009,-
10000 and not only did ninety per cent
of the harvester business of tho
United States, but of the entire
world 1t was a complete monopoly
in that industry.
We convicted the harvester trust,
secured a fine of $2j,O00O0 and an
order from the Supreme Court for the
trust to dissolve. At the request OF
the Department Of Justice we have
furnished the FEDERAL government
with our evidence in the case, and it
is now proceeding with it's prosecu-
ION, following the same lines and Sc
curing the same evidence we devel-,
oped in our trial.
Standard Oil and Republic OIL Cases.
The Standard and Republic oil
suits had Deen won in the state Su-'
preme Court by my predecessor. The
companies carried tue cases to the
Supreme Court of the United States
upon writ OF error, and there for the
first time attacked the constitution
ality Of the antitrust statutes OF Mis-
souri,.
l therefore tell to my lot to sustain
the validity OF these laws in that trib-
unal. The real fight in these cases
therefore took place in the Supreme
Court of the United States. The con-
viction q !he companies in the court
below was a simple and certain pro-
cedure.
The Standard Oil aud Waters
Pierce companies had, by agreement,
divided the territory in Missouri
This is known as a simple combina-
tion in restraint of trade, being the
first step in the four transforming
epochs in this country.
The antitrust laws had been upon
our statutes for twenty-three years
and were written by Hon. Champ
Clark, now speaker of the National
IlOuoS VI vi Ih0
first of last April, in a unanimous
opinion handed down by Justice La
mar, the law was sustained. In thus
winning the cases over some of the
greatest lawyers in the west and in
sustaining the law, we can but feel
proud. III sustaining the law and af-
firming the judgments, we were en-
n h1pA tn pn11ppt tho nino
fines totaling S1O0,00000, and placed
same in the treasury of the state Of
Missouri to the credit of the revenue
fund.
Two-cent Passenger Fare and Lower
Freight Rate Cases.
These cases We're tried by my pre-
decessor. l had no hand in nor any
thing to do with the trial. and these
laws were by the trial court held con-
fiscatory.
1t became my duty 10 take charge
of the cases upon appeal to the Su-
preme Court of the United States,
eighteen cases in all. Two great
questions We're presented to the court:
that of whether or not the laws i'm
pinged upon section S, article l of
the constitution of The United States,
known as the commerce clause; and
whether or not they were confisca-
tory and violative Of the fourteenth
amendment to the Federal conStitu-
tion. In considering these questions
matters of both law and fact were
involved. II affected the right of a
sovereign state TO tiN maximum rates
on commerce wholly within the state.
In my humble Judgment the state
unquestionably kas the exclusive
right and authority 10 regulate and
control interstate commerce, includ-
ing rates and tolls therefor. and Con-
gress has the exclusive yiShr to con-
troll and prescribe rates on interstate
commerce. The mere amount named
as to such state rates cannot impinge
upon the commerce clause. neither
can the reduction Of state rates on
intrastate traffic as a matter of law
change interstate rates. As to
whether or not the rates were really
confiscatory was merely a problem in
mathematics.
We, together with associate coun-'
sci. argued the Burlington case in.
October, 1910, and the court, after.
having same under advisement fori
seven months of its own motion re-
assigned the cases to the docket for
second argument. This was an indi-l
cation that the eight judges before,
whom the case was presented were,
a1uollN