Source: http://www.legalgist.com/what-happened-in-the-case-united-states-v-e-c-knight
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 06:09:27+00:00

Document:
Q: What happened in the case, United States v. E.C. Knight?
(1895) (Court did not apply Sherman Anti-trust act to break up Sugar Monopoly because this was a regulating of manufacturing, not commerce).
i. Gov’t argued that production of a ncessity of life (sugar) involved commerce.
ii. Court holds that the power to manufacture sugar involves control over its distribution-but this is secondary and not primary control. The exercise of power, therefore, is secondary to commerce. Commerce not part of manufacture. Sugar manufacturing bore no relation to interstate commerce, and the Sherman Act cannot be applied.
iii. Dissent – argued that there was a direct impact of manufacturing on commerce.
What's Your Answer to "What happened in the case, United States v. E.C. Knight?"
We have located some similar legal questions and legal question categories. Check out these challenging questions that askquestions about Constitutional Law and are similar to What happened in the case, United States v. E.C. Knight?. Also, we have included a list of some of our more popular legal question categories. These categories are based on what everyone is asking and answering.
State some basic rules of Commerce clause?
What was the holding and the rule in US v. Lopez case?
What happened in Swift & Co. v. U.S.?
Outcome of Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. U.S.
What is the substantial impact on interstate commerce?
What was the holding in the Stafford v Wallace 1922 case?
Give a brief account of the Kentucky Whip & Collar Co. v. Illinois Central Railroad Co. (1937) case?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.