The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-01-10
AGAINST THE TRUST.
Decision of Judge Barrett in the Suit Brought
to Test the Legality of the Sugar Trust.

NEW YORK, Jan. 9.-Judge Barrett, in the
Supreme Court, to-day, rendered decision
in favor of the Attorney general against the
Sugar Trust. The suit was brought by the
people of the State of New York against the
North River Sugar Refining Company by
Attorney General Tabor to forfeit the char
ter of the North River company of this
city, on the ground that it had virtually
passed out of existence by selling out all it's
stock to the Sugar Trust combinations
and closing up all its works. The action
was begun by Attorney general Tabor for
the forfeiture and dissolution Of the char
ter of the North River Sugar Refining Com
pany, on the ground that it had exceeded
its powers 2nG. franchise in becoming
member of the Sugar Trust. Judge Bar
rettB opinion Is the most exhaustive one,
written upon the subjects Of trusts and
monOpOlieS. He summoned the counsel of
both sides before him, and the juror whose
duty it was to merely formally render
the verdict in accordance with the decis--
ion of tho court. The defendants counsel
took exception to the ruling of the court.
Judge Barrett said:
1T did not require an astute mind thai
prepared this most original instrument to
perceive that an aggregation Of partner
and exercise of individual power, would
never effect safe and permanent cohesion.
Accordingly, we find, as one of the first
provisions of the deed, and as basis of the
sO-called trust structure, condition in
turned into corporations. This, in fact,
was done, and thus several of these corpor-
atiOns were organized for the express pur-
pose of creating the very shares of capital
stock through which combination was to
be formed. The partners took on corpora
sion garb, became shareholders and. as
tuch, fitted themselves to enter into a COM
binatiOn within the terms of the deed"
Regarding the profits arising from the
business of each corporation, Ito be paid
over by it to the board hereby created and
the aggregate of said profits, or such
amounts as may be designated for divi-
dends. which shall be proportionately dis
tributed by said board, at such time as it may
determine, to the holders of the shares issued
by said board for capital stock, as herein
before provided" Judge Barrett says: 1T
will be seen that these dividends are not
to be declared or distributed upon the ag-
which is to be turned over to and
held by the trustees, but upon what
might not inaptly, in view of these
peculiar facts be termed the Trust boards
Thus we have series of corporations ex-
listing and transacting business under
the forms of law without real
membership or genuinely qualified
QlTcCtlOu-lncIt aDSIrdCU fragments OF
statutory creation-withOut life in the
underlying association. Every share of
stock has been practically surrendered, and
vital membership resigned. With the
transfer to the eleven trustees the share
holders cease to occupy the position of
celsius que trustent, with regard to the
directors of the various corporations"
Speaking of the scope of the combination,
the Judge says: But they did not stop
there. Provision is made for the gather
ing in of every other existing re-
fnery Tin every instance to be in
cOrpOratedl, and, in fact, four others
have Joined in the combination since
the deed was signed by the original part
nerships and corporations, and the evil
dence shows that in the entire country but
five sugar refineries of the character in
question remain outside of the cOmbina-
ton"
The Judge discusses at length the legal
question, WAS this a combination of cor
stockholders" and decides that it
was a corporate combination, and
says: This combination having asked
and accepted the favor of the law,
it cannot complain that it is taken to task
for grossly offending it's letter and spirit
Fortunately, the law is able to protect it
self against abuses of the privileges which
it grants, and while further legislation, both
preventive and disciplinary, may besuitable
TO check and punish exceptional wrongs,
yet there is existing, to use the phrase of a
distinguished English judge in noted case,
with corporate abuses like the present