Northern+Securities+v.+U.S.

Case Title: Northern Securities Co. vs. United States

Date of Hearing: Argued December 14, 1903 and decided upon March 14, 1904

Chief Justice and Biographical Sketch: Melville Fuller was the Chief Justice during the Northern Securities Co. vs. United States Supreme Court case. He was born in Augusta, Maine, into a family of law practitioners. Both grandfathers, Nathan Weston and Henry Weld Fuller were judges, and his father was a lawyer. While still young, his parents divorced, and was raised by his mother's father, Nathan Weston. Fuller then graduated Bowdoin College, in 1853, and attended Harvard Law School, leaving after six months. Fuller had a minor career in Illinois politics, being a Illinois Representative from 1863 to 1865. He gave the nomination speech for Thomas Hendricks, a Democratic presidential candidate. He became nominated for the Supreme Court by Grover Cleveland in 1888, after being the head of the Illinois Bar Association for two years. ** Is this when he was nominated to be CJ?? **

Documents/Constitutional Amendments Relevant to Case: The main document relevant to this case is the Sherman Antitrust Act. This is because without this act, there would be no legal framework for dismantling this prominent railroad trust. Use of the Sherman Antitrust Act in extremely important, because it provided a test run for use of the Act against monopolies later in America, must notably the Major League Baseball Association. ** Standard Oil?? **

Summary of the case/analysis in your own words: Northern Securities Corporation was an important railroad trust formed in the U.S. in 1902. This company was formed by E.H. Harriman, James J. Hill, J.P. Morgan, and J.D Rockefeller. The company controlled many railroads such as the Northern Pacific Railway, Great Northern Railway, Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad, and many more. Unfortunately, Northern Securities Co. was sued by the President of the United States at the time, Theodore Roosevelt. He believed that the company violated the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. This act states that you cannot practice business activities that reduce competition in the marketplace. As predicted, Northern Securities lost the case by a vote of 5 to 4, because they did not want the company to become a huge monopoly because at the time it was one of the biggest companies existing. So the owner for the company, James J. Hill was forced to break down the company and manage each railroad independently.

Main Issue of the Case: The main issue of the case was that Northern Securities became the largest company in the world (circa 1900) and threatened to form a monopoly in railroad travel in the western United States. The public was extremely alarmed and Theodore Roosevelt decided to pursue a case against Northern Securities. ** NS was larger than U.S. Steel and Standard Oil? Do you have a site to back that up or a stat?? **

Decision Rendered by Court/Vote: The decision of the court was that Northern Securities should dissolve into separate companies. The vote was 5 to 4, with the case being hotly debated by the court till the very end of the case.

Who were the members of the court and for how long had they served on the court: William Day- Served as Scretary from 1899 to 1922 Henry Brown- Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1891 to 1906 Joseph McKenna- Appointed in 1898 and resigned 1925 David Brewer- appointed 1889 and served for twenty years Oliver Holmes- served as an Associate Justice of the of the United States Supreme Court from 1902 to 1932 Melville Fuller- Chief Justice of the Supreme Court between 1888 and 1910 Edward White- served from 1891 to 1894 Rufus Peckham- served from1895 until 1909

Who Voted What, and Why: The case ended up with a vote of 5 to 4. The Northern Securities Co. was forced to break down their company in to smaller independent railroads. The judges that wanted to break down the company were: John Harlan, William Day, Henry Brown, Joseph McKenna, and David Brewer (he agreed with them but for a different reason). The dissents were: Oliver Holmes, Melville Fuller, Edward White, and Rufus Peckham. This happened because the majority of the judges did not want that Northern Securities Co. to become a monopoly. **Using what rationale? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act had been used to stop unions before and now it's used to stop NS and later Standard Oil?? Why did the dissenters vote against it?**

Personal Opinion of the Case: I believe that this case was necessary, not just to protect the average American in the West, but to show monopolies that they could not take control of vital industries to America. Without this case, America would have continued to be subservient to business interests, just like in the 1800's. Also, this case provided a precedent to break up other monopolies, such as Standard Oil.

If the Case Went The Other Way: If the case went the other way, monopolies would be free to form and charge whatever prices they wanted for their services or goods. This would make life for the average American increasingly harder financially, with companies charging exorbitant prices for everything, from haircuts to steak. Because of this case, it protected the American consumer from high prices till today.

**4/7 - Biblio - You used one site for this? Plus, it's not properly cited.** **23/28 -Content - this seems pretty sparse on the explanation, especially on how the Sherman ATA was used differently this time. Plus, see the comments above for the ruling.** **4/5 Organization -- seems like bare minimum done. Sorry.** **31/40 Total**

Citations: []