Evening star., 1937-09-05
Puzzling Aspect of
Antitrust Laws
BY OVEN L. SCOTT,

1t now turns out-Scuttled most of what
had remained of this country's antitrust
laws. The deed, as usual was carried
out In the name of the little business
man"
Also. as usual the loudest senatorial
shouters against monopoly were in at
the sinking. These included William
Borah and Gerald p Nye, who gained
measure of fame as monopoly chasers
during N. r. A. days.
Senator Borah. in fact, was calling
upon President Roosevelt to lead a holy
crusade against monopoly at the very
moment he was joining with his COL
leagues to destroy any chance of such a
crusade. Senators long have been known
to write their own definitions OF con-
sistency.
This time, however, Congress is being
credited by the Governments antitrust
experts with doing neat job.
The Job consisted of drilling holes in
the Sherman and Clayton antitrust acts
under the pretense that little business
men then could crawl through to save
themselves from the rigors of competi-
ton. Senators carefully refrained from
limiting that very big and very powerful
lndustrialiSts could crawl through the
same holes, They paid no attention to
warnings from President Roosevelt, who
had been accused by some of the Sena-
tors OF being friend of monopoly
Neither did they listen when experts ex-
planned that monopolistic groups had
tried unsuccessfully for a quarter of
century to drill the very holes that now
are SO obligingly drilled for them.
1t all really goes back to the N. r. A.
codes, about which Senators frequently
rail. During that balmy period small
business men, as well as big business men
learned what Government could be used
to do for them when the antitrust laws
are out OF the way. Behind the screen
of codes. they got together to control
prices, to protect margins OF profit, to
cut out sharp competitive practices, and,
in general, to ease the effects of compe-
tition.
The general public was expected to pay
the price, but, as often happens, there
was catch. Prices. on the whole, rose
faster than the ability of the people to
pay those prices, and the whole scheme
was about to blow up when the Supreme
Court ordered its death.
What followed was not to the liking
OF many business groups. An every man
for-hlmself era returned to some indus
tries. Others, with tendency to mo-
nopoly control, blithely continued to ig-
more the antitrust laws. The Federal
Trade Commission started to marshal a
new and broader attack on these most
modern trusts.
But then the monopoly chasers in Con-
gress got busy. At the insistence of small
retailers they enacted a law in 1895 to
police trade practices, known as the
Robinson-Patman act. This threw the
Federal Government back into the busi-
ness OF preventing big buyers from get
ting concessions not given to smaller
buyers 1t went farther than N. R. A.
codes
Stlll. there was nothing to keep one
retailer from selling housewife a par
tlcular brand of soap or toothpaste or
breakfast food or other product at a
price lower than that charged by another
retailer. Some merchants became upset
over the way other merchants cut prices
on particular brands of goods. So thev
hurried to get more Government into
business. In quick order, AZ State Legis-
latures enacted laws permitting manu-
1acturers to set by contract the retail
price OF the goods they make and then to
enforce those contracts in the courts.
The Supreme Court of the United States
approved
But Federal antitrust laws continued
to stand in the way Of effective operation
of the State price-control laws.
X
So Congress, during its closing DAYS.
yo11 1rly
from the path of the State price-control
laws. Today, any manufacturer. by put
ting brand or trademark on his prod
uct, can control the price of that product
to the final consumer. And if a mer-
chant violates the price set by a manu-
facturer, that manufacturer can 20 into
court in AZ States and start the wheels of
government grinding to enforce his price.
That is far beyond anything even at
tempted by N. R. A. Codes 1t uses Gov
ernment machinery to protect price-ix-
ing in industry. 1t is writing into law
principle of price control that has been
frowned upon for "A years under the
Nations antitrust laws.
AS an excuse for their action, Con-
gressmen explained that small merchants
now could be protected against chain
store competitors and that everybody
would enjoy profit once prices were
fixed and enforced.
Officials who have spent their lives
trying to make the competitive system
function as it needs to function If more
and more Government controls are not
to be required express the opinion that
the merchants who are supposed to be
helped will be sorely disappointed. The
reason is that housewives can very easily
buy unbranded goods and can depend
upon competition to continue to function
IN the field Of small retail trade.
X
Where the trouble is looked for is in
the big industries, in which competition
already is limited and in which patent
rights and tariff projections even now
provide special privileges Antitrust
laws, through their long history, have
been aimed at these industries, such as
steel and oil and cement and aluminium,
among others. They are basic indus
tries, employing great amounts of labor
and directly influencing the operation of
the whole economic machine.
Now, after years of effort to get legal
escape, they are provided by Congress
with formula to use in evading anti
trust laws.
Thus: Steel beams or sacks of cement
or products of any number of basic in
dustries can be branded as easily as tooth
paste or breakfast food, and, once brand
ed can be fixed for sale at price which
the Government will protect. Even under
antitrust laws monon0liStic nractices