Sherman Anti Trust Act Essay, Research Paper
United States
The U.S. Supreme Court case of Swift and Company v. United States (1905) dealt
with the applicability of the Sherman Anti-trust act to monopolistic businesses in the
meat-packing industry. A number of companies in different states were charged with
coming together to hold back trade in livestock and in the sale of meat. Specifically, they
were charged with price fixing, blacklisting, rigging cartage and railroad rates, and
restricting shipments of meat. The companies argued that, even if the charges were true,
all of the practices had occurred within a single state and were not a part of interstate
commerce
.
This case has alot to do with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The Sherman Anti-Trust
Act is one of the great landmarks in the development of the U.S. government-business
restraint and monopoly of trelationship, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890 was decided
by Congress to prohibit
trusts and combinations in stopping trade or commerce among states or with foreign
nations. The act, named for Senator John Sherman, was the first federal law made to deal
with what was seen as a growing centralization of economic power by monopolistic
corporations . The Department of Justice enforces the act, although private parties also
may bring actions under the act.
A unanimous court, led by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., made the Sherman
act able to be used to back the charges made. Holmes maintained that although the
rade took place within a single state, the “effect upon
commerce among the states is not accidental, secondary, remote or merely probable.” It
had a direct effect on commerce across state lines and therefore came within the authority
of Congress and of the Sherman act. This case revived the Sherman act, which had been
made after a ruling in the united states vs. E.C. Knight Company case in 1895. It also
became an important example for future regulation of local matters, which although are
not usually commerce, are a vital part of the movement of goods across state lines.
The defendants in this case were charged with ten specific charges. The first was
they would go to cities such as Chicago, Omaha, St. Paul, Kansas City, St.Joseph, and
East St. Louis and buy live stock. Then they would take it back to their respective plants
in other states and slaughter the live stock to sell for human consumption. The second
charge is that the defendants were transporting the meat by several railroad companies to
different cities, states and some foreign countries and saying that the meat was processed
in the same city in which it was sold. The third charge was the defendants were using
agents in principal markets in other states and countries to sell to consumers and dealers.
The forth charge is that the defendants hold about six tenths of all regulated sale of meats
in the United States. The fifth charge was for deceiving the government and people by
acting as competitors while in reality the were a collective unit, therefor avoiding charges
of monopolizing the market. The sixth charge was in order to stop competition amongst
themselves in purchasing live stock the defendants have and intend to continue to make
deals to help not bid against each other resulting in the live stock owners to sell at lower
prices then they would receive if the bidding was actually competitive. The seventh charge
was, for the same purposes as the sixth charge, The defendants work together to bid up,
through their agents, the prices of the live stock. They will only do this so that the market
reports will show prices much higher than the state of trade will warrant, This forces stock
owners in different states to make large shipments, to their disadvantage. The eighth
charge was once again in order to restrain competition amongst themselves and also to
monopolize the commerce protected by law, the defendants combined to arbitrarily from
time to time, raise, lower, and fix prices and to maintain uniform prices at which they will