The citizen-Republican. (Scotland, Bon Homme County, S.D.) 1???-19??, 1913-11-13
JAIL FOR TRUST
MAKERS PROPOSED.
RY JOHN sNuRE.

congress is going to have to decide in
coming regular session beginning
In December:
lie the prison penalty for violation
Of h Sherman antitrust law to be
made mandatory?
Is the law to say that men who de-
~liberately violate the criminal features
OF tho anti-trust act shall be sent to
Jail?
This Is the biggest question that con-
front the congress Of the United States
today n 1t Is right up against an
swering IT. 1t has been side-stepped
and evaded for years, but the public
now Is demanding that evasion cease
and that something definite be done
about 1t.
Connected with this question, are
many others which are closely akin
to i. They involve the proposition
as to how the government Is going to
deal with its great Industrial corpora
lions and great railroad and carrier
corporations. with Its trusts mi COM
bihations and m~onopolies. They In
volve the problem OF enforced COM
petition or regulated monopoly or a
regulated competition midway between
the two extremes.
Teeth There, But Don't Bite.
The fact is. as every good lawyer
knows, the Sherman law has teeth. 1t
has sharp teeth, at that. But they
have seldom been used. Nor is there
any reason to believe they will be used
in the future any more than they ave
been in the past unless congress pro-
ceeds to compel the application OF the
prison sentence to offenders. or some
penalty which will make formation or
trusts and combinations in restraint OF
trade too dangerous and hazardous to
engage in.
In any event, congress is going to be
called on this winter to decide what to
do about 1t. In both louise and Senate
there will be strong demand for legisla-
ton which will require the prison sem
tence to be imposed when a man is
found guilty Of violating the criminal
parts OF the Sherman law. and which
will leave no discretion to the court.
Senator Norris Idea.
Not a few men In congress believe
there is a lot OF nonsense in the talk
about the difficulty Of amending the
Sherman law SO as to break up the
They say the real difficulty Is in the
unwillingness of congress to take the
n step which they hold to be neces-
sary-to say the Jail sentence must be
imposed.
Some idea of the feeling anon
thoughtful men in the Legislative
branch may be gathered from this
statement OF Senator George w. Nor
.ris. of Nebraska:
I'VE must amend the law so 1t will
be made Improbable for men to form
trusts and combinations In restraint OF
trade. Thu Jail sentence must be made
mandatory for violation OF the criminal
part OF the law. Moreover, I believe
the law should provide that, when IL
is shown q concern is In restraint OF
trade or an attempted monopoly or
monopoly. the u should be required
to find out how much that concern has
exacted from the public. A receiver
should be named. the property taken
in charge by him, and there should be
paid into the federal treasury twice
the mount which was extracted from
the public by the trust or combination,
This would, in some cases. amount to
confiscation. But 1t would put a stoI
to violations of the lew"
The proposal Of Senator Norris for q
penalty, additional to the prison pen
atty, which would result in making the
unlawful concern lose all It's profits and
Their much more because of its viola
ton of the law is a novel one. Senator
Norris intends to bring 1t before the
Senate when trust legislation comes VI
in the regular session.
Bills Arc Pending.
CONGRESSMAN Thetus w. Sims, OF
Tennessee, long a judge in his state
one OF the foremost members of the
House committee on interstate COM
merce, said:
The prison sentence must be made
mandatory IL VIOLATIONS OIL tHe oLeT-
man law are to be stopped"
This is the opinion Of numerous
others in congress. 1t is the opinion
of numerous officials in the depart
ment of justice who have seen. the in
effectiveness of the Sherman law as i
has been enforced. Bills are pending
in both houses to provide for the prison
penalty alone
Jail Sentences Fail,
Theoretically, 1t is easily possible tt
throw a trust magnate in jail" Mer
talk glibly of 1t. The law provides fol
it. The supreme court says the Law
is constitutional in it's criminal fea'
lures.
But in practice the man who break
the antitrust statutes are not sent t
Jail. They escape either without pun.
ishment or get fines. which to mos
men in the classification bushes
amount to nothing.
1t Is now nearly a quarter Of a cen
fury since the Sherman law was enact
ed. In that time, there has not bee
a single Jail sentence imposed unde
1T by q court which has passed tn
muster of the supreme court. Sue
4