Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on The Sherman Antitrust Act. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 5 page overview of the history of this legislation. The author clarifies the particulars of the Act and illustrates that its provisions have been utilized in a number of quite diverse cases. Sometimes these provisions have been launched with success to end monopolies which were indeed damaging to U.S. economy. Other times, however, the charges launched under the Sherman Act were proved unfounded. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: AM2_PPshermn.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Act is not uncommonly heard in todays world. Despite its relatively common occurrence in our contemporary world, however, this phrase actually has roots which extend much further back in
history. The Sherman Antitrust Act was first activated in 1890. Named for Senator John Sherman (the brother of General William Tecumseh Sherman), it was the first congressional measure
designed to prohibit trusts (Reuters Business Report, 2000). Very simply put, the Sherman Antitrust Act deems a monopoly legal
if its basis is the acquisition of better products or services but when a monopoly is established on the use of power to muscle others out of the way or
to extend a monopoly into a new area it is no longer permissible (Reuters Business Report, 2000). Reuters (1998) illustrates the purpose of this Act as being to bring
to a halt the unscrupulous actions of such notables as John D. Rockefeller and other high rollers who were intent on:
"driving competitors out of their industrial fiefdoms. The trusts they fashioned in railroads, steel and oil crushed their competitors. Ultimately the public became angry
and Congress passed a bill aimed at breaking up the trusts and restoring competition" The
Act would combine with various state provisions which were already in place pertaining to intrastate business. The Sherman Act, however, was not limited to interactions within a particular state
but rather placed restrictions on all interstate and foreign trade. Those who violated the provisions of the Act risked a maximum penalty of a $5000 fine and one year
...