ANTITRUST LAWS, in the United States. The first of these on the statute books was an ordinance of Alabama in 1883 against the pooling of freights by railroads. The first general law against business combinations was enacted by Kansas in 1889. But the general movement against trusts which took shape in legislation was in 1889, when five States and Territories passed laws to render combinations in restraint of trade illegal and punishable, and two more (Washington and North Dakota) incorporated similar provisions into the con stitutions with which they were admitted to the Union. In the first half of 1890 three more States joined the movement with legislation-, and on 2 July the Federal Congress enacted the uSherman Law') against trusts. Nearly all the States have since placed like statutes on their books. The provisions are substantially alike in all, making the persons engaged in such combinations liable to fine and imprisonment, and the corporations or firms punishable by loss of charter or of right to carry on business within the State where the offense is com mitted. The decisions of the Circuit Courts at first were so narrowed as practically to nullify the provisions of the laws; it being held that the combinations, as at common law, must be proved inequitable and injurious to the public, and calculated not merely to abate competition, but absolutely to monopolize the business for the purpose of extortion. But these decisions were reversed by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the laws made no dis tinction between partial and complete monopoly, or equitable and inequitable. It had been claimed also that the laws were unconstitu tional, as violating the 5th and 14th Amend ments, that no person shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law, and that the liberty of making contracts is an essential portion of this; but the Supreme Court inter prets them to mean legal contracts, and that under its power to regulate commerce Congress can decide what contracts are legal; while the State courts hold such regulation is competent to the States under their police power.
The Sherman Act is as follows: 1. Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in re straint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations is hereby de clared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any such contract or engage in any such combination or conspiracy shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceed ing $5,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
2. Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on con viction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding $5,000, or by imprisonment not ex ceeding one year, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce in any Territory of the United States or of the District of Columbia, or in restraint of trade or commerce between any such Territory and another, or between any such Territory or Territories and any State or States or the of Columbia, or with foreign nations, or between the District of Columbia and any State or States or foreign nations, is hereby declared illegal. Every per son who shall make any such contract or en gage in any such combination or conspiracy shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $5,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both said punish ments, in the discretion of the court.
4. The several circuit courts of the United States are hereby invested with jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of this act, and it shall be the duty of the several district attor neys of the United States in their respective districts, under the direction of the attorney general, to institute proceedings in equity to prevent and restrain such violations. Such proceedings may be by way of petition setting forth the case and praying that such violation shall be enjoined or otherwise prohibited. When the parties complained of shall have been duly notified of such petition the court shall proceed, as soon as may be, to the hearing and determination of the case; and pending such petition, and before final decree, the court may at any time make such temporary restraining order or prohibition as shall be deemed just in the premises.