Silly Me:
> > As for Sherman Anti-trust Act, only in few cases was legislation
> >vigorously
> > enforced. Supreme Court blocked attempt to break up monopoly on sugar
> > manufacture (*U. S. v E. C. Knight Co.*, 1895), claiming that interstate
> > commerce covered only 'transportation' of goods, not their 'manufacture.'
jks:
> This is premodern Commerce Clause jurisprudence. No one talked that way
> after the mid 1930s, and even then the Act had been used to break up
> Standard Oil, no small potatoes.
Re. 'premodern CC jurisprudence, my comment about Debs & Gompers
specified 'before 1937'...
Re. Standard Oil breakup, example of ineffectuality of anti-trust
statutes. While dissolution was dramatic, newly formed companies
were in hands of same people. They acted toward each other in
cooperative fashion. Major spinoffs remained - and remain - linked
to one another via Rockefeller banks, respective boards, and joint
exploration, refining, transportation ventures.
Silly Me:
> > 3) Re. Jefferson & constitution, he didn't sign document because he
> > wasn't at 1787 Philly convention, he was in Paris as ambassador to
> > France.
jks:
> While there were things he liked about it, he disagreed with it enough to
> not want to sign it, if my memory serves me well.
TJ's initial protestations (which led him to support second convention)
notwithstanding were less consistent than sometimes suggested. After
he read of amendments (a bill of rights) proposed by Mass. ratifying
convention, he came out firmly in favor, writing to Edward Carrington
(5/27/1788) that 'general adoption is to be prayed for' and expressed
wish for Virginia to be all-important 9th state to ratify.
Silly Me:
> > His 12/20/1787 letter to Madison (who had sent him copy
> > upon completion) indicates that he liked separation of powers,
> > liked legislative power to levy taxes, approved of direct election
> > of House of Rep.'s even though he thought such an assembly would
> > be 'illy qualified' to legislate because he supported principle
> > that people should only be taxed by representatives chosen directly,
> > he commented positively on apportionment by equal number (Senate)
> > & House (population) and expressed favor for legislative voting
> > by individual members rather than states, and he liked executive
> > veto power (and would have preferred similar power for judiciary,
> > which suggests something akin to judicial review).
> OK, and so? --jks
TJ's initial protestations notwithstanding (which led him to support
second convention) were less consistent than sometimes suggested. After
he read of amendments (a bill of rights) proposed by Mass. ratifying
convention, he came out firmly in favor of ratification, writing to
Edward Carrington (5/27/1788) that 'general adoption is to be
prayed for' and expressed wish for Virginia to be all-important 9th
state to ratify.
Oh silly me, I'd already written above, well, comments are applicable
in both instances... Silly Me (aka Michael Hoover)
