The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-03-13
.,cco TRUST TRIUMPHS.
! .xrL IT'S CHARTER IN
80 y SUCCESSFUL.

ouor Reed of New Jer-
Flee l r,,s, an Opinion Diminishing
'F and Ending the Litigation.
fh'O Instituted by JObbers
!" uad Been Refused Trust
VIZ W.. because They Handled the
S Gov cigarettes-A synopsis al
;, pecisiOn.
tf L. March 12.-In the suit
TF'l.0' annul the charter of the
ros" r,bacco Company and break Up
Ans','r r,,vn as the tobacco trust, Vice
wh' r-, Reed this morning filed an
Ca'a''i ,,s,nissing the bill and ending the
opH-'. ntsation against the company. In
pTss'-, mage of the vice chancellor, the
the '-9 as brought ito restrain the de-
aclu from transacting their business
el-, ,..,, conducting it in manner pre-
anu - d, the compliments and injurious
y 1' he people of the state of New Jer-
sG sin was fled by Attorney General
lD an The petition of ]. r. & Frank
9,', Miller iobbers in paper cigarettes
n.,on the American Tobacco Com
WIZ fused to deal, according to the al
p'1 .,n of the Niillers. because they per-
ts 5 in also handling the Admiral
manufactured by rival cor
Among other things, the
slod set out that for
W Years prior to Jan. 81, 1890, the
,focturers composing the American
1900 company, transacted business in
.,se,tlv of each other. The trust was
=. formed. being composed of William
v,mbau and James T. Hart, under the
~ name of w. S. Kimball & Co., of
,,sester: Charles G. Emery, under the
,ame of Goodwin & Co., of New York;
-lsn & Ginter of Virginia; w. Duke &
s-c 70. of North Carolina, and the Kin
N Tobacco Company, of New York. The
initial stock was SIS, 600, 600, and they have
g.c selling % per cent. of all the ciga-
yrss sold in the country. The complain
ms alleged that soon after they began
sailing in Admiral cigarettes, they re-
sayed a communication from the Ameri-
I'm Tobacco Company, which expressed
tteir disDleasure This was followed by a
rsfIsal Of the American Tobacco Company
10 sell them more goods. Vice Chancellor
Reel holds that the equity court has no
Jurisdiction, that the proceedings should
lave been brought in the nature of quo
ran3nto, and that corporations have a
ight, when legally formed, to deal the
ame as individuals
The points raised by the compliments
nd Vice Chancellor Reeds full views
nay be inferred from the following
yllabus, which he has attached to the de-
ision:
First-A court of equity does not possess
he power to restrain a corporation or
aniZed under the forms of law from per-
lrming acts within it's corporate power,
erely because some of the measures
lken in organizing the company may
ave been irregular or because the pur-
)se of the incorpora tors may have been
establish a monopoly.
these conditions quo war
INTO is the proper proceedings to chal-
nge the right of the corporation to ex-
else its franchises.
Thlrd-A trading or manufacturing cor
ration, until it's charter is annulled by
ch proceeding at law, has the same
ithority as an individual trader or man
acturer to sell or consign its goods, to
lect its selling agents and to impose
ndtions as to whom they shall sell and
e terms upon which they shall sell.
FOurth-A decree restraining the Off
rs and agents of a corporal ton from
.ecuting corporate acts is the same as
decree founding the corporation itself
R. v Linderbury of Elizabeth, and
Dseph H. Choate of New York conducted
e case for the American Tobacco Com
nv