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.
266
PART XITI.
the objects had in view. (Swift dc Co, v. United States, supra, 396; United States v. St, Louis Terminal 224 U. S., 383, 395.)
In the Union Pacific ease the business which was competitive between the two railroads was but a comparatively small part of the sum total of all the traffic, State and interstate, carried over the two railroads. Therefore it was urged that only an incidental restraint of trade had resulted from the combination, such as ought not to be held within the law. Mr. Justice Day said, however, referring to the competitive traffic :
(88) It was by no means a negligible part, but a large and valuable part, of interstate commerce which was thus directly affected.
(4) United States v. Reading Company (226 U. S., 324). Decided December 16, 1912. Opinion by Mr. Justice Lurton.
Defendants, a number of coal-carrying railroads and mining companies producing and transporting 75 per cent of the annual supply of anthracite coal, combined to prevent the construction of an independent and competing line of railway into the anthracite region. The plan devised was to acquire, by means of the instrumentality of the Temple Iron Co., a corporation all of whose stock was owned by defendants, the coal properties and collieries controlled by the largest independent producer, whos(^ su])port had l)een promised to the proposed n(^w line of trans])ortation. The plan succeeded, for the i)r()i)ei'ties having been acquired by the Temple Iron Co., the projected competing railroad was abandoned.