THE ORANGE ROUTING CASE
673
courts are placed in an awkward dilemma. indulged in between two competitors living Either they must enforce the law and de five miles apart on different railroads. Two moralize commerce, or repudiate the law railroads running by parallel routes across and preserve commerce. state lines may not combine their business, Fifth, competition is the father of mon but one millionaire may buy them both. opoly. Success in competition means the Two stage-drivers traversing a state line by destruction of competition. The victor parallel roads may certainly form a partner must of necessity find himself without com ship if they wish, but two railroads may not. petitors. The monopolist is but the suc An agreement between competitors not to cessful competitor. To compel competition sell for less than cost, or not to sell at less by law and at the same time prohibit than a six per cent profit, may be highly monopoly by law is to compel battle and beneficial; an agreement between them not deny victory to the victor, to encourage the to sell above a fixed figure may be some times not undesirable; but an agreement means and defeat the end. Sixth, competition fosters combination. not to sell for less than a conventional, arbi Its end being success to the strong, the wise trary, and extortionate price may be in the will always combine for strength. highest degree objectionable; yet all are Seventh, competition constantly requires condemned alike. the restraining hand of combination. Ninth, the principle of competition is, Nothing could display better than the pres even in theory, irrational and unsound. It ent case the disastrous consequences of free is founded upon a specious and deceptive competition, and its need of restraint by syllogism: monopoly is a great evil; com combination. petition is the opposite of monopoly; good Eighth, the principle of competition is is the opposite of evil; therefore competition impossible of consistent application. Com must be a great good. It is also founded petition which is beneficial among capital upon, and is intended to maintain, the right ists may be highly injurious among laborers. of every man to earn his livelihood as he Competition which is beneficial between two pleases, free of compulsion or prohibition neighboring grocers may be highly injurious of any kind. But instead, by its own inex between two neighboring railroads. Com orable nature, it subjects him a priori to petition is thought to be a sacred and in the compulsion and prohibition of stronger alienable right; but the Chinese can compete fighters than himself. with us successfully on our own ground; We in this country have declared loudly they must therefore not be allowed to com and without reservation for competition. pete. Special reductions in transportation The Sherman Anti-Trust Act announces, rates from the wafehouse to the railroad protects, and fortifies this great principle in station are wholly legitimate; but special a manner certainly plain and consistent reductions in transportation rates from the enough. We have by that law, said the railroad station in California to that in New Supreme Court in the Northern Securities York are anathema, though they are pre case, "prescribed the rule of free competi cisely the same in principle. Discounts in tion among those engaged in such com the purchase of raw material and discounts merce. . . . Every combination or con in its transportation are alike in principle, spiracy which would extinguish competition but vastly different in practice. Competi between otherwise competing railroads is tion through railroad rates may not be in made illegal by the act. . . . Whether the dulged in between two competitors living free operation of the normal laws of compe five miles apart on the same railroad, but tition is a wise and wholesome rule for trade competition through railroad rates may be and commerce is an economic question
