The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-03-04
ADrxEsE 10 Trust AcnEEMENrs
An Important Decision In Test Case
Against the STANDARD an Company.
Jtoa 'se Cincinnati Commercial Gas,ne.

Jtor, me Cincinnati Commercial Gas,te.
COLUMBUS. Ohio. March 1.-The Supreme
Court to-day handed down one OF tho most i'm
ss hssSry OF The trb s Tho u sSent
OF tho decision cannot be known, until the
p ns o OF no %sSs C p% wss
trast somSinatloRs IN ohio HdSsrssly t to th s
e est tsast II s*stsnss ths sanda1a III Com
TWEEN ses 'sas' SSjS5 and ~
-" Ohio, OK, rel. Attorney. General. vs.. Tho
OF raG thu In rb #:
agreements set forth in the petition, and of
thS power to perform tn" SANG; fteported."
brought by ex-Attorney- General Watson, in
his official capacity. to est the validity. under
tho STANDARD oil Companies Of Ohio. Pennsyl-
vnnia. New York. New Jersey. and other States.
and which had excited the Of sae
In the petition for jpdGmen. Of custer the
formed. This agreement was not signed by the
tSs eon panys sea Was not Sttaehea but i
was signed by the stockholders of the COM
asSs aS 6ss s o GS%
the dividends, declared by the, trustees Of the
trust. and had quietly surrendered their COR
tlon. OF the trustees. The signing by tho stock
holders was claimed to be the action Of the
were unlawful. For these rea sons It was aske ed
that tas be oasted from the sh
words that the trust partnership be declared
void. There was no attempt to gust tho
ordinary corporation. and the decision rem
dere1 does not prevent the company from
Ths Sss f. s S1e that
some stockholders hnd signed the trust agree
but thn hsy ad s s
company ought not to be held respopsible for
hook. In addition to this they pleaded the
statute Of Limitation.
ton went 70 New York. ' secured the original
dSc t that all the stosk da
amended answer. to which the Attorney;Gen-
eral demurred, and on this demurrer the issue
The history Of this eorporation is the record
t III fRey Vent
oyer into Pennsylvania and incorporated an
%as SsM as RSTs
themselves over many other States. Finally
they all came together and formed . corporate
the BUSINESS and stock Of the Companies to a a
central or b
each OF the other trustees 1926. 900 year.
The existence OF tho trust agreement was
not known to the q public i until three years ago
investigated the subject OF trusts Then the
iocked IN the safes 81 the pany. In fact. Il
was part OF the contract that THIS agreement
Be kent ssa saps f sssP 81
Ing to or $500 shares q 500 each *
sa IN oS The
being held by the. trustees There were
the laws Of Ohio requiring that director
must be stockholder in the company. one
share was retained for each Of the seven d.
rectors. How. with its. united strength. the
impossible. is better known than the enormous
extent OF its property holdings.
Tho new law principle established in this
State is that the signing OF the agreement by
Guided the surrender Of tbs stock to the
trustees. was corporate action. The fact
that the suit was decided against the company
seems to be sufficient evidence that this prln-
Ex- Attorney. General Watson was asked to-
day what his opinion was. He answered that
It seemed to settle the question Of trusts in
the State OF Ohio. although he could not tell.
without examining the opinion Of tho Court.
nctIy what points are decided. The counsel
for the State feared more than any other point
Of the answer tho setting UP OF the statute Of
Il is not known what tho Standard Oil Com
that If they lost tho case they desired to
amend. How the case can DO reopened is not
The Attorney General of New York has
the trust to begin similar suit against 1t In
New York.