II.

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS RELATING TO TOPICS TREATED IN PART II.

We here consider such provisions as specifically relate to combinations to create restrictions upon competition. But we omit any reference to many provisions confined in their application to specific lines of business, such as the numerous prohibitions against the consolidation of parallel and competing railroad or telegraph lines, or the recent provisions against combinations to fix rates of insurance. We here merely give a list of what are commonly known as "antitrust acts." In this connection reference may properly be made to the constitutional provisions in some States, specifically prohibiting monopolies, as the provision of the Texas constitution, art. 1, § 26, that "monopolies are contrary to the genius of a free government, and shall never be allowed." To similar effect are provisions in the constitutions of Arkansas (art. 2, § 19); Maryland (Declaration of Rights, art. 41); North Carolina (art. 1, § 31); Tennessee (art. 1, § 22); Wyoming (art. 1, § 30).

The following is a list of the anti-trust acts in the different States (including the Federal acts):

UNITED STATES: Act of July 2, 1890 (26 Stat. at Large, p. 209); act of August 27, 1894 (28 Stat. at Large, p. 570; see § 34 of Tariff Act of 1897). ALABAMA: Criminal Code (1896), §§ 5557-59.

ARKANSAS: L. 1897, ch. 46.

CALIFORNIA: L. 1893, ch. 19 (limited to live-stock).

FLORIDA: L. 1897, ch. 4534 (limited to cattle and meat).

GEORGIA: L. 1896, p. 68; see Const., art. 4, § 2, par. 4.

IDAHO: Const., art. 11, § 18.

ILLINOIS: L. 1891, p. 206 (as amended by L. 1893, p. 89; L. 1897, p. 298);

L. 1893, p. 182 (Starr & Curtis' Statutes, vol. 1, pp. 1252–57).

INDIANA: L. 1897, ch. 104.

IOWA: Code (1897), §§ 5060-67.

KANSAS: General Statutes (1897), ch. 145.

KENTUCKY: Statutes (1894), §§ 3915-20; see Const., § 198.

LOUISIANA: L. 1890, ch. 86; L. 1892, ch. 90 (Wolff's Revised Laws, pp. 204, 205). See as to rebate certificates, L. 1894, ch. 176 (Wolff's Laws, p. 907). Const. § 190.

MAINE: L. 1889, ch. 266.

MICHIGAN: Howell's Statutes (Supplement), §§ 9354j-p (L. 1889, ch.

225).

MINNESOTA: Statutes (1894), §§ 6955-57; see Const., art. 4, § 35.

MISSISSIPPI: Code (1892), § 1007; ch. 140 (see as amended by L. 1896, ch. 89; L. 1898, ch. 72); see Const., § 198.

MISSOURI: L. 1891, p. 186; see as amended by L. 1895, p. 237; L. 1897, p. 209.

MONTANA: Penal Code, § 321; see Const., art. 15, § 20. See as to combinations of laborers, Penal Code, § 325.

NEBRASKA: L. 1897, ch. 79; see chs. 80, 81; Statutes (1895), § 6959. As to rebate vouchers, see Statutes, ch. 73a.

NEW MEXICO: Compiled Laws (1897), §§ 1292-94.

NEW YORK: L. 1892, ch. 688, § 7; L. 1897, ch. 383.

NORTH CAROLINA: L. 1889, ch. 374.

NORTH DAKOTA: Penal Code (1895), ch. 51; see Const., art. 7, § 146. OHIO: L. 1898, p. 143. By Revised Statutes, 7th ed., § 6934a, cornering and forestalling are made crimes.

OKLAHOMA: Statutes (1893), ch. 83.

SOUTH CAROLINA: L. 1897, ch. 265 (see as amended by L. 1898, ch. 487). See Const., art. 9, § 13.

SOUTH DAKOTA: L. 1890, ch. 154, as amended by L. 1893, ch. 171; L. 1897, ch. 94.

TENNESSEE: Code (1896), §§ 3185-91, 6622; L. 1897, ch. 94. See L. 1897, ch. 93. See Code (1896), § 3077.

TEXAS: Civil Statutes (1895), arts. 5313-21a; Penal Code, arts. 976988d.

UTAH: Revised Statutes (1898), §§ 1752–62. See Const., art. 12, § 20. WASHINGTON: Const., art. 12, § 22.

WISCONSIN: Statutes (1898), SS 1747e-h, 1791j-m.

WYOMING: Const., art. 10 (Corporations), § 8.

on case for injury, 1, 73.

for inducing refusal to deal, 38.

who has right of, for prevention of dealing, 67.

right of, for mere restriction upon competition, 161.
see INJUNCTION.

liability of, under Texas anti-trust act, 160.

of party to agreement in restriction of competition, rights and lia-
bility of, 171.

see PRINCIPAL AND AGENT.

AGREEMENT —

not to bid, as creating illegal restriction upon competition, 94, 168.
see RESTRICTION UPON COMPETITION.

constitutional limitations upon, 106.

power of Congress and States respectively to enact, 107.
extension of, beyond proper scope, 109.

see FEDERAL ANTI-TRUST ACT and under names of States.

ARTICLES OF NECESSITY

-

ingrossing limited to, 105, 142.

doctrine against restrictions upon competition, whether confined
to, 142.

by-law or rule of, as creating illegal restriction upon competition,
148.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL-

proceeding by, 162.

as party to proceeding after dissolution of corporation, 180.

solidarity of interest of employees as justifying, 53.

by trade union, 54.

of newspaper, 56.

legality of acts accompanying, 61, 65, 67.

announcement of intention to do lawful act, by way of incident

to, 70.

injunction against, 78.

application of Federal anti-trust act to, 121.

as created by enforcement of rule of exchange, 149.

BUSINESS-

liability for interference with, 2, 3, 46.

conspiracy to destroy, 8.

conspiracy to injure in, 12.

fear of injury to, 67.

injunction against injury to, 82.

see CUSTOMER; NEWSPAPER.

BY-LAW-

as creating illegal restriction upon competition, 126, 148, 168.

CAR TRUST-

nature of, 152.

CARRIER-

grant by, of exclusive privilege, 90.

discrimination by, as tending to build up monopoly, 92.

prohibition of Interstate Commerce Act against discrimination by,
92.

criminal liability of, for conspiracy to raise rates of transportation,
160.

see RAILROAD.