The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-01-23
TRE POSSIBLE AND THE IMPOS-
SIRIE.
An Opinion of some " the suggestions
IN the Presidents Trust Message.


To THE EDITOR OF The StN-SV' Inc
Presidents tariff policy ana his currency
policy have been 50 Tar very successlu.
and he has justly derived great deai
OF prestige thereby II. Success vi nls
Mexican policy hangs IN Tue phihhcs enu
II looks very much now as u 'he 'eSl
cent inade caruina' ,'''s'"he :" ~.
recognizing liuerta AT the outset t"a'
is ~ 'unR rs ne "iu ho' "i,s"' w
Nenc' furCihly In Mexico II Huorta did
not clear out REFUSAL 10 RECOGNIZE
liuertl under these circumstance w'S
only hIuii' ana up 10 the ples.nt ',''e
fiuerti mas succeeu'u III preventing '"o
BLUM from being maze toou.
As 10 the tTtSl"'i'S W ~. .t,'t ".
trust po'l'y' IL u Nv'E "'un'.u' =,
Will succeed as an eh'teN' Iarts oi II
nave Undoubtedly met WIN s'io's p.pu,
lar approval lhere ~ no PueSt,o'' NJ an
but that the time mas come 'oI 'n, p's
Ing 81 inc extreme ioi'nS VI i,''cl'' MS
directorntes. The pubic ana prooapiy
even the railroads themselves Wou'u hos
object 10 HoVethhs',' supe' 'sIo' ",
railway stock ana pohu ISSUES any SUI,
SUPERVISION. however II II 10 W we car icu
on by the Interstate commerce Coinit'is.
sion. would require either an eh'atseh'eh'
OF the membership "t tne 'o"i'''SsIo, ".
some subdivision OF the i"pors vi .na'
body. Inc conliilssIpH IL "''""s ~
dened Win MorN anu ''S '''"'p..
hardly he calico upon W u" tNe's.i'''.s
An lht'rs,a'' Uhuc S.,r ~, ,,s
also probably he uhobJectiohhp'' nut US
work would certainly be hlhheteu py 'hs
fact that our great trace anu nhahc'a.
interests would not pe WHINE 'o "ceeP,
the judgment or inns commission 90 ma
upon any important qutsuon su".,''''cu w
H. such body could not take 'he P'ace
or the courts. 4.
But President WILSON'S proposition L"
establish by law maj uthnloohs W VIVA.
constitutes monopoly ana restraint OF
trad" Will most assuredIy meet WIN
failure. For twenty years inc ""sei9
and courts or the ldtu naNe pee" Y"
deaVoring to max" these nehh'uons' anu
| do not thhh lt'slueht Nisui'' III. rS''
advisers ana the present tnehhuers vi Tul'
greSs possess any greater aoIl'y a.ons
THIS line thaii mas p'vh SHOWN w VIC p"..
The fact Is that the subjects reterret 10
are In their nature indenhapIe. r-NeIs
case under the sherman Jaw s'"',"S Wy
Itself rests upon us own pas,s n''u nv
be considered IN the hsht OF uliefe'' eii
cumstances ana SURROUNDINGS. Nh "
may he restraint OF r"ue d, "I'o .''
ana may NOT De res',a',' ~, ~
another; ana II iresinent Whsoh WI
take the trouble TO read the decisions III
the cases determined uhuer tte Sh'l ma !,
law he VIII mn III a'iiosl every oHe vi
these an expression ot op''l."' w
part or the Judge making 'he u e'is'o',
that II Is Impossible To frame te'era,
definition or what restraint OF traue anu
monopoly Is Inc ffesiue', VIII ii"u !.
much better to- leave the sherman law
as II X. lie has th"re law Which Is
absolutely comprehensive anu i''ViusN, III
It's nature" covering every puHs,"'e -"
proper act. II al attempt Is hlaue L" ue-
fine the extent and purport ot the statu,e'
such extent ana puipoTt VIII i''ess"il'E
be confined to the definitions n,dut anu
the amendments or dehnitohs' instead VI
lettering the SITUATION from the ''o'c'h-
ments point OF VIEW Will h1dhe u ""isc
The views lately expressed on this poi,'
by the venerable ex-senator ftorEe r.
Edmunds, who wrote the ANTITRUST Jaw