New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-01-10
erFKc 20 PREVENT
TNJUS~ PROSECUTION
c,,cory SECS No Conflict of
Authority with Trade
Commission.


..- themselves before ta>.nC action
.-e Go O. sta.emco. ..su'a with
.~,-o,a. of Attorney General Greg
.5.r.ra- Tie also explains ;ha;
.s.-s no danger OF tric..on between
t.. 3erar.mcnt and the Federal Trade
commission.
The statemen, is given out by the
...~,bo- Of Commerce OF the United
...,es after being submitted for Mr.
c-lcorv's approval. IL IS the result o.
..ve-aI interviews in an effort to Clarity
... IeraI business situation FOR the
,.-,s. % business men. The statement,
d.. rart follows:
~Tbf Attorney General pointed out
.... -re sherman act is enforced by
.Ls nsre~tmcr. OF JCs.icc n the same
.~s,-s~ AL. according 20 the same
- Of .el-cy as otner statutes with
.sc sare cave and with neither more
..- Ice. riror Plain or Intentional Vlo-
-,.,o-s arc proceeded against ylsor-
D~srv rs under other statutes. men,
S.tr I'll statutes. doubtful cases
$50 .- which there was no intent 10
,.o,s,o t-e law .hey are dealt with Just
a. st-,lar cases under otner statutes
s-e 5saI, with that j., wlth view TO
enforcing strict compliance win the
-s,. br- without unnecessarily stigma
.--.r~ on unnecessarily DurGenlng with
,,,.rs-,or ~crsons who have been non
os.i~ r,i..aton as 20 the law and who
.s~l realy 90 rectity their mistake
,rt-T-ust Law Misrepresented.
..~o.hsr cause OF this misunder-
..s-.,--. said the Attorney General IL
.,e rers.s-ert misrepresentation 10
which The sherman act has been SUP
,se.e4 be- r.oDagandists who are OPP
,oss5 90 the competitive principle ana
,.bo seek 20 undermine that prlncipie
b, o++err.lrr 10 create IN the puOic
,-;-f r,,sg,vings and confusion both as
~ The meaning and as TO the manner
~ enforcing the law embodylng 1t.
"Vour poiuts were then taken up
TIE covrlairt that the law IS uncer--
ain. the policy Of the Department OF
fr.,.ee as regards the method or en-
forcir. the law in admittedly couotiuI
c.ses. the means adopted by the de-
,artner. 10 guard against unjust pros
scY+iors. and the policy Of The depart
rent I'm cases where II ana the Fedora;
TraSe Commission are DOth charged
with the enforcement OF the law.
"The Attorney General stated that
while concededly, there "a in the Ia"
an area Of doubt. in the vast MAJ
NJ cases u il not difficult 10 tell whether
proposed transaction Is or IS not IN
violation Of the statute. and the DOUBT
=. certainly no greater than that when
is accented as q matter OF course IN inc
application Of other laws.
'aTbe Attorney General stated that
,-bere men have entered into transac-
lion believing in good faith that the
transaction is a lawful one, i has not
been and would not be the policy OF the
department 90 invoke extreme pena!tles
against them Tn such case the DE,
par.ment would consider the lust ana
fopronriete and quickest way OF en-
forcing tho law would be by a civil pro,
eeecing. in which the question lnEolVeu
could be contested or consent decree
entered. according as the defendants
desired. or bv a notice 10 the parties
Of the departments conclusion, with OPP
rortur.ty 20 abandon or mociiy 'he
transaction.
Give Companies Chance.
"Ir This connection the attention OF
The Attorney General was called TO
Paragraph T o. Section O. the FED
oral Trade Commission law, which au-
horizes the comm ss,or, upon appHca-
ION Of the AttorrC General, TO IN
,estiga,e and 10 max. recommendation.
.or the reaGiustmeut of the business OF
any corporation alleged TO be violating
The antitrust acts. so that the corpora
ton NAV thereafter maintain its or.
gsnizauOn, management and conducI OF
business In accordance with IA" anu
he was asked whether ne could state
hat the policy of the Department OF
Justice would be with regard TO lnv0h-
ing that provision He replied tnat,
while he FELT certain that this would
prove 20 be q most serviceaOle pro-
vision in solving practical question:.
which often arise in the enforcement OF
me antitrust laws, IL was as yet 700
carly, in his judgment, 20 attempt 10
psrticu.ari1e as TO the cases IN whlcn
she Department of Justice should call
upon the Trade Commission for assist
Slce under this provision speaking
generally. he stated that he did not un-
cerstand that the provision contemplat-
cd that ne should refer TO the commls,,
on the question whether the law had
ueen violated In given case, Du'
'a,her questions Of the feasibility. ade-
cuacy or Gdysability Of proposed rene
oes from practical standpoint. Wnere
cihcult questions o. business organiZa-
ions and OF finance shall be encoun-
,ered 10 will be the desire and the
'olcy of the department 10 seek the as
s.sts1cc % the Trade Commission
The discussion then turned TO the
measures taken by the department TO
guard against prosecutions for which
mere Is no just ground. On this point
lhe Attorney General stated that no
Proceeding is ever instituted until after
me most painstaking and exhaustive IN
NesugatOn Of The facts which II is pos
s4ole 20 make. As part OF this IN
curry The person or corporation against
"hom complaint is made, unless IT mas
already declared It's attitude, Is gwen
i1!i opportunity 10 submit its defence
Oeiofe any action is taken.
Seek to Prevent Weak Suits.
This is done. he pointed out. not
ONy as a matter Of justice TO those
against whom complaints are made, but
as matter Of prudence on The part of
Sle department, for least Of all has the
department any interest in instituting
.u' "hlcn should subsequently turn
wy 70 be without foundation.
., AS 10 It's policy in cases where both
C ne department and the Federal Trade
Sohinlssion are charged with the en-
1Cylcement Of the Law, as under the
..a!'9n act, the Attorney General
stated that the department would in
general be guided By the principle
when governs the Federal and the state
r ,. IN cases where they have concur
s s' jurisdiction. That is TO say. in
e.! such case. If the Federal Trade
i,l1'S slon were the first 10 exercise
waot,,.S9qgicuon, the Department Of Justice
;ulea await the conclusion Of the com
"selOn-s Proceedings hefnre fakinc any