The development of the Trust type of combination aroused a 
storm of opposition. This was scarcely remarkable. The power, 
intangibility and secrecy of the organization, its extra-legal char 
ter and its lack of amenability to law all ran counter to American 
’deas of justice and legality. The opposition rapidly gathered 
strength. Under the pressure of public sentiment both the Re 
publican and Democratic parties—although it was recognized 
that the campaign would be fought out on the tariff issue—in 
serted Anti-Trust planks in their respective Presidential platforms 
ln the conventions of 1888. This action later bore fruit in the pas 
sage of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. In the meantime, 
the State Legislatures had not been idle. The latter eighties and 
early nineties witnessed a flood of State Anti-Trust legislation, which 
swept the entire country. Kansas, Nebraska, Maine, Michigan, 
North Carolina, Iowa, Kentucky and Illinois were conspicuous 
leaders in the movement. By 1894, the statute books of about 
twenty States showed legislation of one kind or another looking 
toward the suppression of Trusts, Pools and other combinations. 
The exhibits in this chapter have been intended merely to give an 
idea of this legislation.—Ed. 
Exhibit i 
THE SHERMAN ANTI-TRUST LAW 1 
An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints 
a ud monopolies. 
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, 
1 Act of July 2 , 1890, 26 U. S. Stats, at Large, 51st Cong., 1st Sess., chap.