Page:Earle, Does Price Fixing Destroy Liberty, 1920, 170.jpg

170 a common knowledge of those involved, or so that the ordinary man should be familiar with it, it is amply and justly sufficient. But he must or should have actual knowledge from that already determined, and not from surmise or guess or conclusions upon which there be no fixed standard and different results must necessarily be reached by different minds differently circumstanced.

All this has been so long, so frequently, and so justly, and continuously announced, that one feels almost helpless at having to discuss it again. Over a century ago said in the Sharp case, later confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States itself:  "Laws which create crime ought to be so explicit in themselves, or by reference to some other standard that all men subject to their penalties may know what act it is their duty to avoid." See, too, the Brewer case, affirming this. And this is exactly the basis of the decision in the Standard Oil, the Nash, and the International Harvester cases, with a multitude of others.

The Lever Act is, therefore, in this respect, perfectly constitutional; for, though it names no "standard," there is a well established "standard" that the Common Law, for perhaps a thousand years, and the Supreme Court have, again and again, announced. Each owner, as well as each purchaser, has always had the right to fix the price at which he will sell or will buy, provided only that there is no restraint of competition, no unlawful monopoly or act. The Lever