The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-10-21
GLUCOSE TRUST DECISION.
Ex-JudRo Gary Thinks It's Application Is
Not So Mide ns HIS Bcen Snppnsed.


The decision OF the Supreme Court OF iii
nois in the case OF George +. Harding and
others against the American Glucose Com
pany. handed down on Thursday. was made
the excuse In Wall street yesterday for the
sellng OF tho stocks OF a number of prominent
industrial corporations, 1t was decided by
the Illinois Court that the Glucose Sugar Re-
filming Company 10 an illegal combination un-
der the Illinois Antitrust Law OF 1891. and
that the deed Of sale to the Glucose Sugar Re-
filming Company by the American Glucose
Company of its plant at Peoria must be set
aside.
Wall street appeared to have jumped at the
conclusion that the decision not only meant
the immediate end OF the glucose combina-
ton. but that It was a serious blow to the
various other large industrial combinations
Neither OF these conclusions is warranted
Laws like the so-caed antitrust law of Hi
nois have been passed by the legislatures OF
almost every State OF the Union They are
laws simply forbiddinR monopolles. The
question In each case under these laws is
whether the corporation in issue Is or is not
monopoly
In the case Of the Glucose company there
was no effort la the immediate litigation to
dispute the alleRat ion that 1t was monopoly.
Bv drmurrinC, the sole answer made by tina
standing in court in his effort to prevent the
transfer to II OF n certain factory.
Whether the Glucose company is or Ia not
monopoly and whether any other industrial
corporation is9r is not monopoly are cues
tons .! fact still TO hs determined upon trial
Regarding the situation. both as affecting tho
GlucoSe Company and as affecting other in
dustrlal CORPORATIONS. former Judge T.. II. Gary.
President of the Fedora steel Company. made
this abatement Yesterday:
think undue prnminencs has been given
TO the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in
he Glucose Sugar Refining Company case.
| understand the decision is based upon
the allegations OF n bill OF complaint
which proposed to convey its property to the
Glucose Company and that the case was heard
and the decision made upon demurrer and
without any inquiry into the actual facts. AS
the bill alleged that the property was to lac con
vcyed for the purposes OF an unlawful combi-
ing the bill was taken as confessed, because no
answer was interposed and no evidence intro
duced, the Court was compelled to assume that
the allegations were true. II ! am correctly
pany will now have the opportunity Of filing
an answer and submitting evidence. and may
obtain decision upon the merits OF the case.
- 1t IL therefore plain to he seen that the de-
cision which has been made Is not final or CON
elusive and that 1t is not even an indication OF
However. think. whatever may he the result
OF the Harding case. II will have no
application to most OF the large corporations
which have been formed within the last
no sense either monopolies or trusts, although
the terms have been indiscrminatsly applied
| 80 far as the Federal Steel Company Ia con-
| cerned. think no one has ever claimed that
It's organization or its business was in conflict
with the laws OF the United States or OF any