Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1920-03-02
SUPREME COURT RULES
AGAINST DISSOLUTION
OF STEEL OCTOPUS
CONFINED From Page IL

acts.
Also the decree marked utter
rout for the government in its suit,
which was begun in 1911 in the
New Jersey federal court and which
has been one of the longest, most
voluminous and most costly pro-
Ceedings in supreme court annals
The case, records Of which fill
small room, was twice argued in
the high court, in March, 1911, anu
again last October. A truce sus
pending action during the war, was
agreed upon in 1918.
Although todays decree leaves
the government free TO bring
new proceedings for specific
and present practices deemed in
conflict with the antitrust law,
department of justice officials de-
clared no thought had been given
to future action,
In its appeal, the government
contended that to sustain dismiss
sal of its suit by the New Jersey
court would result in licensing
enormous corporations which fall
just short of complete monopoly
and would place the courts stamp
of approval on development of in
dustry by combination instead of
competition.
The majority referred to Presi-
dent Roosevelts APPROVAL of the
steel corporations acquisition Of
the Tennessee Coal and Iron com
pany, declaring his action, while
not making that merger legal, gave
assurance OF its it, legality as we
know from his earnestness in the
public welfare nc would have APP
proved of nothing that had even n
tendency to itse detiriment."
To sustain its decree that the
steel concern is a good" combina-
ton, the majority found il controls
about half of the American Iron
and steel trade, including mines,
mills, railroads, ships and ore
fields. Monopoly, the opinion de-
clared, has not been achieved. Its
power over prices, the majority a.
so declared. is unequal to it's pro-
portiCnate production
Good conduct of the corporation
was emphasized by the majority
who held it has not oppressed com
i.petitors or dictated prices. That
| conduct of the steel concern paral-
| lels the oil and tobacco trusts, -
was denied by the majority, which
| declared the latter had been found
guilty of illegal practices. while
any illegalities of the steel com
| bination's organization were tran
! silent in their purpose and effect"
and since abandoned. Reference
was made to the famous Gary
dinners" at which steel corpora
ton officials met with competitors
to agree on prices.
The government, the majority
dOeclared, was reduced to the sole
contention that mere size, or big
ness, of the organization lis an abb
horrence to the law" Unused ca
pacity for monopoly or oppression
the court held is not punishable
| The courts duty, it was declared
is to punish and check any actual
| violations.
In its enunciation of the new APP
plication to he given the Sherman
/ law regarding public interest in
each case, the court said:
1T is clear in its denunciation
of monopolies and equally clear in
it's direction that the courts SHAH
prevent and restrain them, but the
command is necessarily Submissive
to the conditions which may exist
and the usual powers of court OF
equity to adapt it's remedies e
those condition. = We do not
mean to say that the law is not its
own measure and that it can be
| disregarded but only that appro-
pirate relief in each instance Is per-
mitted to a court of equity to de-
termine, not to advance a policy
contrary to that Of the law, but in
submission to the law and it's policy
and In execution of both"
! In conclusion the majority said
they were unable to see that the
public interest would be served BY
yielding to the contention of the
government respecting dissolution
and we do see a risk on
public injury, Sincluding Il material
disturbance Of, and it may be q
serious detriment to, foreign trade
In reply the dissenting Justices
declared that the corporation "vio-
lated the law in its formation and
its immediate practices" and, "be-
ing formed Illegally, should he dis
solved into competitive units. II
had been demonstrated, the minor
ity held, that the corporation was
over capitalized with "watered
stock"
"If the Sherman law is to be Civ
en- efficacy" the opinion declared
there must he decree under
taken as far as possible that which
has been achieved in open, motor
liOus and continued violation of the
law"
! 81 agree" Justice Day contin-
ucd, that the act offers no objec-
ton to nero size of a corporation
when that size has been
obtained by lawful means and de-
lveioped by natural growth al
though its resources, capital and
, strength may give to such a cor
Iroration dominating place
But | understand the re-
iterated decisions of this court
4 - to hold that this power
I may not legally be derived from
Iconspiracies, combinations or con-
tracts in restraint of trade. To per
Init this would be to practically
Iannul the sherman law by judicial
ldecree."
! Contesting the majority's inter-
'lpretation of the law, the dissenters
declared that if changes now are to
I be made in its construction or OPP
Iteration, congress and not courts
Ishould act,
Both the holding corporation
land its subsidiaries. the dissenting
lopinion declared. were organized in
Il plain violation" of the law and
under the majority decree, arc
made immune because of some
public reasons requiring such a
conclusion"
Il know of no public policy,
lsaid Justice Day. which sanctions
a violation of the law, nor of any