The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1907-02-28
Standard Oil Cast.

Standard Oil Company and @. D.
Holt VS.. State, Summer County.-This
case is based on what is commonly
known as the antitrust law. The
Standard Oil Company was fined $500
and @. D. Holt was fined $4,000 in the
Circeit Court OF Summer County. The
statute provides that all arrangements
to control the price Of any product or
article are unlawful and void; that do
mastic corporations shall forfeit their
charters and foreign corporations shall
be prohibited from doing business in
Tennessee. There are two counts in
the indictment charging violation of
these provisions by plaintiffs in error.
8. W Love ia o merchant at Gallatin,
and it appears that he ordered ten bar
rels Of oil frem the Evansville Oil
Company, and J. E. Conner, General
Agent of the Standard Oil Company at
Nashville, sent Holt to Gallatin with
instructions to get the order counter
msnded. Holt gave Love 100 gallons
of oil and he countermanded the order.
1t is charged that this was done un-
lawfully and wickedly and with a view
of destroying full and free competition
in the price of oil.
The Standard Oil Company has
agencies established in different places
and storage tanks from which it deliv-
ers its product. j. E. Conner was the
special agent at Nashville, controlling
all of the other agents in his territory,
composed of part of Tennessee, Ken
lucky and Alabama. G. d. Holt was
q salesman under Conner and O'Don
nell Rutherford was the local agent al
Gallatin, his duties being to sell and
deliver, selling at prices made by Com
er.
Claud Rose sold and procured orders
for abouta car load of oil for the Evans
vile Oil Company on Oct. 8. 1908, tt
be shipped from Oil City, Pa. A few
days later Conner wrote to Holt, ant
Holt went to Gallatin, and Love did,
in consideration of the gift of 100 gal
Ions of oil, countermand the order, ant
similar arrangements we're made will
others. Holt informed the authoritie
at Gallatin regarding the oil to be ship
! ed by the other company, and instruct
ed them to look out and collect taxes
Is. W. Love and others did refuse II
accept the oil from the Evansville Com
pany. 1t appears that when the Evans
vile Company abandoned the town tn
Standard Oil Company advanced tn
price from 10! to 143 cents per gallon
Conner testified that he condemne'
Holt for giving away the oil, and Hol
testified that he gave it on his own &C
count. The copy of the letter condemn
ing Holt and the reports of Holt AM
Rutherford as to sales we're not place
in evidence.
/ The plaitiffs in error assail the con
stitutionality of the statute, Stain
that itapplies to contracts and arrange
ments in relating to the regulation G
interstate commerce, and contend tha
it is void. It does not appear to tn
court that the act applies solely to in
terstate commerce, and it cannot agre
to this insistence. A number of citf
tions to decisions on this point al
made. There is no intent as to intel
state commerce, but the intent of th
Legislature was as to all commerce
within the State, and that there was
necessity for such o law was matte
of common knowledge and it certai
that merchandise of this character Wa
intended to be included in the act. Th
court holds that the Legislature il
tended to legislate as to all commerc'
. and not to stop short OF Its power. lib
purpose is to protect the commerce
the State, and such statutes have fir,
quently been sustained dy the cour
of other States and the United State
There is no averment that the sale We
to control the price of oil to be impor
ed, but the charge was to lower til
price Of oil which had been importe
{ by the Standard Oil Company, whiC
r was then in Tennessee and subject
> the police power of the State.
The Standard Oil Company contend
that if the law is constitutional Ii
penalty applies to natural persons an
not to corporations. The punishmeI
. for corporation is by a forfeiture
lie franchise, etc. The court has