536 HASTINGS—POLICE POWER OF THE STATE. [June 19, 
purchase, the Philadelphia refineries were operated in pairs for 
reasons of economy, and a little more sugar produced than before. 
The American Company bought them in order to 
‘obtain a greater influence or more perfect control over the business of 
refining and se/Zmg sugar in this country.” 
After such purchase the American Company refined and sold all 
but about ten per cent. of the sugar used in this country. 
These facts were shown in an action brought by the Attorney- 
General of the United States to enjoin the consummation of the 
purchase by the American Company, generally known as the Sugar 
Trust, and to compel the restoration of the stock and franchises to 
the four companies. The act of Congress referred to provides for 
the punishment of persons violating it, and also for proceedings in 
equity in the United States courts to enforce its provisions. 
The Circuit Court dismissed the action, and the government 
appealed it to the federal Supreme Court, and in an opinion by 
Chief Justice Fuller the decree of dismissal was confirmed. He 
did not think commerce a part of manufacture nor manufacture a 
part of commerce, nor that arrangements to control manufacture 
were combinations to interfere with interstate commerce. He, 
therefore, held the matter not within the power of Congress. 
“It is vital that the independence of the commercial power and of 
the police power, and the delimitation between them, however some- 
times perplexing, should always be recognized and observed; for while 
the one furnishes the strongest bond of union, the other is essential to 
preserve the autonomy of the states as required by our dual form of 
government, and acknowledged evils, however grave and urgent they 
may appear to be, had better be borne than the risk be run in the 
efforts to suppress them of more serious consequences by resort to ex- 
pedients of even doubtful constitutionality.” 
He finds the power to govern men and things within the limits 
of its dominion 
‘a power originally and always belonging to the states, not surrendered 
by them to the general government, nor directly restrained by the con- 
stitution of the United States and essentially exclusive.” ... . ‘‘ That 
which belongs to commerce is within the jurisdiction of the United 
States, but that which does not belong to commerce is within the juris- 
diction of the police power of the state.” 
The case of Kidd ws. Pearson, cited as to its argument that 
