The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-12-03
SHUTS THE DOOR.
Judge Dana Rules Out Texas
Harvester Trust Action.
Can Not BE Considered in the
Kansas Case.
GRIGGS ON THE STAND
Tells How He Lost the Agency
i'm Topeka.
Wouldn't Sign the Exclusive
Agency Contract.

question of the admission as evidence
in the case of the state against the In
ternational Harvester Company of
America, of the Texas confession" in
which the harvester company confess
ed judgment and paid a fine of $35, 600
state. The decision was in favor of
the harvester company as Judge Dana
ruled that the evidence in that case is
not admissible in the case on trial, for
the reason that there was no conviction
on the part of the state of Texas.
The court held the payment of the
fine imposed by the Texas authorities
by the company to be more of a COM
promise than an admission of guilt on
the part of the harvester company. This
was thought to be point of vital issue
in the trial of the present case as 1t
showed the methods employed in alb
Sorbing the independent manufacturers
of harvester machinery by the Inter-
national Harvester company.
Later on and in the evidence of p.
w. Griggs, a former implement dealer
in Topeka the point was brought out
even more forcibly than had the Texas
evidence been admitted. This bit of ev-
idence came in the form of a statement
made by Cyrus Mccormick, president
pany before the Implement Dealers
association held in Kansas City in 1903.
Mr.. Griggs ON Stand.
The entire morning was consumed in
hearing the evidence of Mr.. Griggs and
when the court adjourned at noon,
Judge Dana had under advisement the
striking out of the portion of the testi-
nOny of Mr.. Griggs regarding Presi-
dent Mccormick statements made at
the Implement Dealers convention in
Kansas City. a,-+s
Mr.. Griggs is one of the pioneers in
the implement business in Topeka,
having been engaged In this line of
business in the city for rs years prior
to year ago. He testified that he had
handled machinery during this period
of time, most of the time for independ-
ent manufactures, but for one season
he handled the goods placed on the
market by the International Harvester
company and at that time was refused
a contract because he refused to con-
form to it's requirements.
Why did you discontinue the agency
for the International Harvester COM
pany?' asked Attorney General Jackson
of Mr.. -Griggs, the witness.
THE gaency was taken away from US
at the end of the first season because
we refused to sign a contract while it
contained the exclusive clause which
machinery as we purchased, from the
International people" -.-s'-
Did you sign in the first season"
mo, not without erasures and a
clause; inserted which provided that we
could dispose of the machinery of other
makes which we had on hands at that
time" '.--
Were you refused contract for the
season of 1862" ri
Yves"
"Why was this DONE, If you known
Refused to Renew Contract.
1.-The agent for the International COM
pany, Mr.. Rees, refused to renew our
unless we would sign it just as
it came from the company. We refused
to do this and an agent for the COM
m nj frfh IJS
checked up the machinery and repairs |
we had on. hands and after settling |
with us placed the agency in other |
hands here in the cityc 49,
Can you state as an implement man |
what the duties of a block man such |
as handled the business of the harves-
ter company consists of?" asked Attor- |
ney General Jackson of the witness.
Yes, L think so. They make con-
tracts, settlements and collections and
look after the general business of the |
ar
What lines of machinery did. Mr..
Mckee handler"
He had charge of all of the different |
makes of machinery handled by the |
Harvester company in
this territory" s-rfe-les
Did you ever hear q statement made
by Cyrus Mccormick, president of the |
Harvester company, of /
the purposes of the company"
Yes" ,--- ~ .-...-.
when was it and where?"
''At a speech made during the Imple
ment Dealers association for Kansas,
Oklahoma and Colorado held |
in Kansas City in 1903"
What did Mr.. Mccormick say at |
that time about the manufacture or
maner of handling the goods of the In
ternational Harvester Company of
He said that the combination of |
which he was the head owned or con-
trolled 95 per cent of all of the money
used for the purpose of manufacturing |
and selling harvesting machinery He
said that it was the purpose of the con-
solidation to eliminate all unnecessary |
and provide for a uniform |
price at which machinery could be sold
at a less cost and at the same. time
make more money for. the dealer as
we'll as the manufacturer. He also said
that the consolidation would do away
with the employment of so many
travelling men and materially reduce
expenses. ..-.
You say that you heard talk made
~ Cyrus Mccormick in Kansas CITY in
1903. What did he say and how did he
come to saw IT ?'
hat he had made to the question when
t was propounded TO him by Attorney
General Jackson and Attorney Vermil-
ion moved TO have this answer as well
|
he record and withdrawn from the |
ury, on the ground that the statement
# the president of a company is not
,inding on the company
This precipitated an argument and as
t was nearly noon the court took a re-
,ess reserving a decision. The matter
# the consideration of the testimony is
considered of great Importance both by
he state and the defense. and the rul-
ng of Judge Dana on this point may
,rove vital to the issties at stake.
A rather amusing Incident occurred
ate last evening when dapper little