Some interesting information, tho I cannot claim to have read the whole thing closely. In inveighing against the Associated Press (see for example my #7), I have relied on Adam Smith, but it is clear that not only Sherman but many other acts, before and after the Norman Conquest, attest to the moral rejection of monopolies.A10, it seems according to “Dubious Origins” linked above that your suspicions about the constitutionality of Sherman were shared vociferously in 1890 by Senator George, who the article says was vindicated by events but who was ignored by everyone else in Congress.
I sympathize with your desire to have someone critique your analysis; I have wished for more substantive critique of the analysis scantily outlined in my #7. Unfortunately I don’t seem to be the one who can pick up your challenge. I can only comment that if the AP were subjected to the kind of antitrust action which seems amply warranted by the facts, the MSM might suddenly get religion about the constitutionality of Sherman.