Brief for the United States (1914)

294 PART XIII. with whom he might trade from so doings they being deterred solely because of the influence of the report circulated among the members of the associations. In other words, the trade of the wholesaler vatli strangers was directly affected, not because of any supposed wrong which he had done to them, but because of the grievance of a member of one of the associations, who had reported a wrong to himself, which grievance when brought to the attention of others it was hoped would deter them from dealing with the offending party. This practice takes the case out of those normal and usual agreements in aid of trade and commerce which may be found not to be within the act and puts it within the prohibited class of undue and unreasonable restraints, such as was the pai^ticular subject of condemnation in Loewe v. Lawlor, supra. The argument that the course pursued is necessary to the protection of the retail trade and promotive of the public welfare in providing retail facilities is answered by the fact that Congress, with tlu^ right to control the field of interstate conmierce, has so legislated as to prevent resort to practices which unduly restrain competition or unduly obstmct the free flow of such commerce, and private choice of means must yield to the national authority thus exerted. {Addyston Pipe Co. v. United States, 175 U. S., 211, 241, 242.) ■jfr It * * *