The Washington times., 1912-08-31
ANTITRUST LITIGATION IN PRIVATE

Company, New Jersey corporation operating from
Boston, was indicted as conspiracy in restraint OF
trade Shortly thereafter this newspaper, on the
strength of advices from New England stated that
the accused company was using all possible inhuenc
to secure court order for taking the testimony in
private. The statement so remarkable that at the
time it was not commonly accepted as possibly true.
Nevertheless, Judges Putnam, Colt, and Brown,
of the Federal court at Boston, have issued ordet
that the shall be heard in private. Press and
public will be excluded from the hearings. This
was the view originally taken by Judge Putnam, who
was quoted as declaring that too much publicity has
already been given to this case" Because Of
strenuous objection, he postponed final order to
this effect, and his original purpose is confirmed
by the rule in which the three judges unite
1t is difficult to understand what Judge could
mean by talking about too much publicity in such
a case. Publicity is the very remedy toward which
all the tendency and spirit of present legislation and
administration tend 1t is ridiculous if formal and
nominal requirements of publicity may be enforced
against law-abidng concerns but secrecy be thrown
about the dubious practices of great corporation
which gets far into conflict with the laws that it
comes inducted to the bar of the Federal court.
There has never been like rule in any case
under the Sherman act and it is safe to guess that
there will never be another The United Shoe Ma
chinery Company is Of the very most powerful
concerns in New England Through its control of
patents, processes and leases, it effectually monop
ozes the machinery used in making footwear.
Through its own immense wealth and its far-reachng
and intimate affiliations with the financial powers it
is fairly beyond attack at either of these points.
little over two years ago, Thomas G. Plant, a
successful shoe manufacturer in order to break away
from the company's control in the machinery busi-
ness, put out a rival line Of machines. They were
held by various experts the best ever produced
Plant, it has been charged, instantly confronted
with ife-and-death fight for existence. His credit
was broken down, his obligations bought up, mmedi-
ate payment was insisted upon, and in a very short
time he was forced to choose between bankruptcy
and sale of his line of machinery and patents to
the trust.
He sold sold it is true, on terms that are under.
stood to have given him great profit But it left
the monopoly of the machinery company vastly
stronger than ever
In all the history of Standard Oil and like manip
uations to ruin rivals, there is no startling
story than that which has been outlined in the accu
sations against the United Shoe Company Yet It i:
now ordered that the testimony regarding these ng
is to be taken in private Every precedent is thrus
aside to protect with the hand of the Federal court
an accused criminal conspiracy.
tanly be Congressional inquiry, of some sort o.
other In the present temper of the people with tn;
courts, nothing could be more unfortunate than ht
addition of new grounds of dsaffection with them
Recently we have seen Congress pass bill TO
the abolition of special Federal court not yet tw
years created, because that court had, by series o
determinations utterly forfeited the confidence OF th
very legislature that created it.
We have seen one judge of the. court impeache
by the House, and now awaiting Trial by the Senate
for alleged misconduct.
We have seen another Federal judge, long
judicial in his jurisdiction resign by wire whe
an investigation of his conduct had reached the pon
where impeachment immnently threatened.
This is no time for courts to assume authority t
make star-chamber rules in favor of accused law
breakers. There can be but one result of such pei
formances They will break down whatever is lei
of confidence in judicial fairness and impartialit!
with results profoundly disastrous.