COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURE IN FLORIDA 107

 The Umted States Supreme Court has repeatedly held
that only unreasonable restraints are prohibited by this
statute. However, as interpreted by the courts, this law
applied as well to farmers' cooperative associations hav-
ing marketing contracts as to combinations of industrial
corporations This worked an unjustifiable hardship on
farmers who wished to form cooperative associations,
since it is much more difficult for a farmers' cooperative
association to gain monopohstic control of a commodity
than for a combination of industrial corporations to do
so. Agricultural producers and organized labor, alike,
became so dissatisfied with the working of the Sherman
Anti-Trust Act that Congress amended it by passing the
Clayton Act in 1914.
 Section 6 of the Clayton Act reads as follows:
 Sec. 6. That the labol of a human being is not a com-
modity, or article of commerce. Nothing contained in
the anti-trust laws shall be construed to forbid the exist-
ance and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural
organizations, instituted for the purposes of mutual help,
and not having capital stock or conducted for profit, or
to forbid or restrain individual members of such organi-
zation from lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects
thereof; nor shall such organization, or the members
thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations
or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the anti-trust
laws.
 It will be noted that this Act simply made it legal for
certain types of labor, agricultural, or horticultural as-
sociations, to exist. Only associations not having capital
stock came within its scope, and these were not granted
any operating privileges.
 As the number of cooperative associations increased
and the volume of cooperative business grew, it became
obvious that the Clayton Act was not broad enough in
scope. Associations requiring a large amount of capital
were especially handicapped, because capital stock as-