that the original Section 7 was part of a legislative program de-
signed to limit the freedom of large corporations to engage in
aggressive business practices rather than a change in the Sherman
Act policy with respect to corporate mergers.

In addition, the Federal Trade Commission, in administering
the section, failed to develop a workable policy with which to
apply the general criterion of illegality of the statute to specific
cases of stock acquisition, and, therefore, the responsibility for
the emasculation of the section rests as much with the commis-
sion as with the courts.

Aside from the substantive change implied in the inclusion of
asset acquisition in the prohibitions of Section 7, the amendment
of 1950 changed the standard of illegality in such a way that it is
necessary for the Justice Department and the commission, in the
process of administration of the section with the review of the
courts, to develop anew a workable policy with which to apply
the general criterion of illegality to specific cases. It appears that
the commission, in administering the amended Section 7, is doing
a much better job of implementing and giving specific content to
the statute than it did with the original Section 7.

The study begins with a brief investigation and analysis of the
development of the corporate combination movement, its effect
on public opinion, and the development of the law of mergers
before the enactment of the Clayton Act in 1914. The legislative
history of Section 7 is reviewed for the purpose of defining the
reasons for its enactment. On the basis of the published records,
as well as material from the files of the Federal Trade Commis-
sion filed with the Temporary National Economic Committee and
deposited in the National Archives, the policies of the commission
are analyzed along with the construction of the statute by the
courts. The legislative history and the implications of the 1950
amendment are examined. An attempt is made in the concluding
chapters to bring into focus some of the theoretical economic
questions implicit in the administration of the law.

-2-