Brief for the United States (1914)

Record Details:

Title:
Brief for the United States
Date:
1914
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Government Printing Office. Office of the Public Printer
Volume:
Brief for the United States
Leaf #:
00021
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
{"Media History Digital Library","Richard Koszarski",Domitor}
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
June 06, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

I'Ain II. 9 pcM-niissihIc to allow thai to he done wliidi the statute prohibits. It matters not wliat fonii the coiiihinat ion may tak(^ or what K'"i' '> <>r dress it may put on. Ml*. Chief fJust iee White said in 1 he Tobacco decision (22.1 U. S., 1()()) that it had hccn hehl in the Sl<uul(tnl Oil case that the first and second sections of the act taken together embraced every conceivable act which could possibly come within the s})ii*it or ])urpose of the prohibitions of the law, without regard to the garb in which such acts were clothed. That is to say, it was held that in view of the general language of the statute , and the public policy which it manifested, there w^as no possibility of frustrating that policy by resorting to any disguise or su])terf uge of form, since resort to reason rendered it impossible to escape by any indirection the prohibitions of the statute. This was not the declaration of any new principle, for in the Northern Securities case, Mr. Justice Harlan, referring to the Sherman Act, had said (193 U. S., 197, 347) : No device in evasion of its provisions, however skillfully such device may have been contrived, and no combination, by whomsoever fonned, is beyond the reach of the supreme law of the land, if such device or combination by its operation directly restrains commerce among the States or with foreign nations in violation of the act of Congress.