5. Whenever it shall appear to the court be fore 'which any proceedings under section four of this act may be pending, that the ends of justice require, that other parties should be brought before the court, the court may cause them to be summoned, whether they reside in the district in which the court is held or not; and subpoenas to that end may be served in any district by the marshal thereof.
6. Any property owned under any contract or by any combination, or purchased to any conspiracy (and being the subject thereof) mentioned in section one of this act, and being in the course of transportation from one State to another, or to a foreign country, shall be for feited to the United States, and may be seized and condemned by like proceedings as those provided by law for the forfeiture, seizure, and condemnation of property imported into the United States contrary to law.
7. Any person who shall be injured in his business or property by any person or corpora tion by reason of anything forbidden or de clared to be unlawful by this act, may sue therefor in any circuit court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found, without respect to the amount in conspiracy, and shall recover three fold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee.
8. That the word or °persons,* wherever used in this act, shall be deemed to include corporations and associations existing under or authorized by the laws of either the United States, the laws of any of the Terri tories, the laws of any State, or the laws of any foreign country.
In February 1913 New Jersey attracted con siderable attention by the passage of a bill known as Seven Sisters which were supposed to represent the personal views of President Wilson on the trust problem. These acts defined a trust as an agreement between corporations, firms or persons for the creation of trade restrictions or the acquisition of monopoly, for the limitation of production or for the raising of prices. They fix the personal responsibility of directors, officers or agents and they forbid differences in prices in dif ferent sections, allowance being made for quality, cost of freight, etc., when such differ ences have the obvious purpose of creating a monopoly or killing competition. They also forbid the holding of stock of other corpora tions, except for payment of debts, for tem porary investment of surplus funds in corpora tions in other lines of business, for the invest ment of benefit or insurance funds or for de preciation or rebuilding purposes. Rights previously acquired, however, are exempt. Future mergers must be approved by the board of public utility commissioners and filed with the secretary of the State.
In January 1914 four bills were introduced into Congress by Representative Clayton of the House Judiciary Committee. These de fined illegal acts; the granting of relief to per sons injured by the operations of trusts; check ing the interlocking of boards of directors and the creation of an Interstate Trade Commission.
After much discussion and compromising the final result was the passage, 15 Oct. 1914, of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, designed as a sup plement to the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in its more explicit definitions of illegal acts. It also forbids any corporation or firm from sell ing its commodities at different prices to its different customers if such action tends to create a monopoly or lessen competition. Nu merous exceptions are made, however. Another provision forbids a manufacturer to sell his goods to a dealer on the understanding that he will not buy goods of the same nature from a Decrees in government trust snits 11 be sufficient evidence for private suits for damages under the anti-trust laws. Furthermore, in the case of private suits the statute of limitations shall begin to run only from the date that a decree is entered in a government suit. Holding companies are pro hibited in that one corporation may not own stock in another where the effect is °to sub stantially lessen competition° or to tend to create a monopoly. Another section makes it illegal for one person to be an officer in more than one bank, or of two or more corporations engaged in the same line of business. More over, common carriers may not deal with cor porations having, in common, directors or offi cers with themselves, except by competitive bidding.
Included in the °Clayton Anti-Trust Act* is the Trade Commission Act, which provides for the formation of the Federal Trade Commis sion, to consist of five members appointed by the President and the Senate for terms of seven years, not more than three to be of the same political party. This body was to take over the bureau of co rations and continue its investigations. What constitutes 'cunt air of competition, when not specifically defined by the other provisions of the Act, is to be left to the judgment of the commission, which is a power similar to that given the In terstate Commerce Commission, in the matter of railroad rates. The commission may order hearings and may enforce its commands through the Circuit Court of Appeals. This court is given exclusive jurisdiction and power of review over this law, but not in regard to facts with respect to orders of the commission. The commission has, in fact, almost unlimited in pursuing its investigations. On 13 ly 1915, the commission had been organized and established, the President's nominees be ing Joseph E. Davies of Wisconsin; Edward N. Hurley, Illinois; William J. Harris, Georgia; William H. Parry, Washington; George Rublee, New Hampshire. All except the last two were confirmed by the Senate, the objections being raised on account of political activities. Mr. Rublee, however, was given a recess appoint ment when anigress adjourned. Consult Walker, Causes of Trusts and Some in American Economic Association Quarterly (1910) • Giddings, F. H., 'Democracy and Empire) (1900).