Mr. Sherman's bill found little favor with the Senate. It
was referred to the Judiciary Committee of which I was then
a member. I drew as an amendment the present bill which I
presented to the Committee. There was a good deal of opposition
to it in the Committee. Nearly every member had a plan of
his own. But at last the Committee came to my view and reported
the law of 1890. The House disagreed to our bill and the
matter went to a Conference Committee, of which Mr. Edmunds,
the Chairman of the Committee, and I, as the member of the
Committee who was the author of the bill, were members. The
House finally came to our view.
It was expected that the Court, in administering that law,
would confine its operation to cases which are contrary to the
policy of the law, treating the words "agreements in restraint
of trade," as having a technical meaning, such as they are
supposed to have in England. The Supreme Court of the United
States went in this particular farther than was expected.
In one case it held that "the bill comprehended every scheme
that might be devised to restrain trade or commerce among
the several States or with foreign nations.
Pages:
1356
1357
1358
1359
1360
1361
1362
1363
1364
1365
1366
1367
1368
1369
1370
1371
1372
1373
1374
1375
1376
1377
1378
1379
1380