Intent on being a trust-buster in his own right, Taft employed the services of his politically unseasoned Attorney General George W. Wickhershan, whose broad and vigorous attacks on the trusts frightened and angered the business community. Then in 1911, the Supreme court ruled in favor of the Sherman act on two major cases.
Standard Oil Co. of new Jersey v. Untied States.
The Supreme court found Standard Oil guilty of entering into contracts in restraint of trade and monopolizing the petroleum industry through a long convoluted series of anticompetitive actions. The court ruled that Standard Oil should be divided into several competing firms.United States v. American Tobacco Co.
In the Tobacco case, the Supreme Court found that the 29 defendants had been engaged in a successful effort to create a monopoly within the manufacture, sales, and distribution of tobacco in the Untied States and abroad. The main company, The American Tobacco Company, was divided into 4 separate companies.These two cases added to the fury of business men and caused much political pressure to mount against Taft. It was now very clear that the Supreme Court and the Taft administration were remaining loyal to the Sherman Act. Many of Taft's friends were warning him that his stance was hurting his chances of being re-nominated in 1912, but Taft would not budge. Amid a growing feeling among many lawyers, businessmen, economist and politicians that the Sherman Antitrust act should be repealed or amended, Taft and Wickersham decided to stay on track.
In his 1911, address to congress Taft talked at great length about both the Standard Oil and Tobacco cases, and then denounced any movement to repeal the Sherman Antitrust Act. He defended the anti-trust act against his critics who claimed that the law was ambiguous and was obstructing big business. First Taft pointed out that the recent cases made it clear that there was nothing in the law that "condemns combinations of capital or mere bigness of plant organized to secure economy in production and a reduction of its cost", but rather that it is only when the purpose is to stifle competition and establish a monopoly that the law is violated. Second, the law was not ambiguous. Taft explained,
"when men attempt to amass such stupendous capital as will enable them to suppress competition, control prices and establish a monopoly, they know the purpose of their acts. Men do not do such a thing without having it clearly in mind."
Finally, Taft summarized the importance of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
"The anti-trust act is the expression of the effort of a freedom loving people to preserve equality of opportunity. It is the result of the confident determination of such a people to maintain their future growth by preserving uncontrolled and unrestricted the enterprise of the individual, his industry, his ingenuity, his intelligence, and his independent courage.
For twenty years or more this statute has been upon the statute book. All knew its general purpose and approved. Many of its violators were cynical over its assumed impotence. It seemed impossible of enforcement. Slowly the mills of the courts ground, and only gradually did the majesty of the law assert itself. Many of its statesmen-authors died before it became a living force, and they and others saw the evil grow which they had hoped to destroy. Now its efficacy is seen; now its power is heavy; now its object is near achievement."
Republican Command:
1897 - 1913, Horace Samuel Merilll (pgs 324-327)
No comments:
Post a Comment