Brief for the United States (1914)

Record Details:

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'AKI \III. Ir.-idr ill llic sill) jcri i \ (' sense, Imt contracts (H" acts which t he( »ret ica I ly were altempls to nioii(»])()li/e, yet wliich in practice had come to he considered as in resti'aint of trade in a hroad sense." It W(dl may he tliat I'nimini; a c(»rnei' tends for a time to stimnhite conipet it ion : hut this does not prevent it from bein^ a forhi(hlen restraint, for it also o])erates to tlnvart tlie usual operation of tlie laws of supply and demand, to withdraw the connnodity from the normal current of trade, to enhance the price artiticially, to hamper users and consumers in satisfying their needs, and to produce i)ractically the same evils as does the suppression of competition. ■K -K -X (543) Upon the corner becoming effective, there could be no trading in the commodity save at the ^^^ll of the conspirators and at such price as their interests might prompt them to exact. And so, the conspiracy was to reach and to bring within its dominating influence the entire cotton trade of the country. Bearing in mind that such was the nature, object, and scope of the conspiracy, we regard it as altogether plain that by^ its necessary operation it would directly and materially impede and burden the due course of trade and commerce among the States and therefore inflict upon the public the injuries which the Anti-trust Act is designed to prevent. See Swift cf Co, v. United States, 196 U. S., 375, 396-400; Loeive v. Lawlor, 208 IT. S., 64717—14 19