OCR Text |
Show oo REASON AND LAW. It Is probable that In futuro the criminal feature of the law will be more largely relied upon by the government gov-ernment as a deterrent to monopoly. In tils event the question of Intent will evidently bo of very great Importance. Im-portance. The general legal doctrine 1b that thero is no crime without Intent, In-tent, but this Is only la rule of construction con-struction which maybo negatived by the legislature. There is a class in which tho courts have hold that the plain language of statutes made immaterial im-material the question of Intenu In such cases the fact that the persops charged havo violated the express prohibition of the law Is sufficient ground for conviction. While it still is open to question as to whether the Sherman law Is in tho same category, yet, whero a mouopoly has been actually created, it will probably be wellnigh Impossible for defendants to escape upon the ground of lack of IntenL Persons are al ways presumed to have Intended tho natural effects of their acts, and the doctrine of Intent even whero applied, t especially in cases of purely stautory delinquencies, has been beaten out very thin. Thero may be and probably are sound objections to the statute on economic grounds, but I do not bolievo that it can bo successfully challenged chal-lenged upon the ground of vagueness or uncertainty It has always been a difficult question to draw tho lino between be-tween "direct" a'nd "Indirect" contracts con-tracts and combinations restraining trade. The difficulty Is more acuteiy and genorally pressing today because of the approach to actual monopoly In so many of the necessaries of life. I cannot think that Justice Harlan is Justified In considering the present decision as really at variance with former decisions. Taking theso decisions decis-ions together as a coherent whole, there can bo little or no doubt that the result reached in every one was similar to that which would have been reached upon the assumption that tho statute was merely declaratory declara-tory of the common law . it must seem deplorable that so much confusion confu-sion should have arisen over what now seems to have been a battle of words Frederick R Coudert In the July number of the North American Review. -- . |