The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1907-02-05

DuuSeL LOT lue uScal year OF lSVS III
all amounts to upwards of twelve mil
lions, or nearly four hundred per cent
increase in twelve years.
offer some further facts which may
be of service in arriving at correct
understanding of the situation.
am familiar with the conditions as
they existed before the formation of
the trust and have been a close stu
dent of the conditions since that time.
was called to New York City by the
trust managers the day after the trust
was formed in 1902 and I then and
there heard from their own lips the
plausible explanations and fair
promises of better things for the deal
ers and farmers. So strong was the
statement issued at that time by the
trust managers that the fears of the
trade We're largely allayed and for a
period of more than year. during the
formative period of the Trusts organi-
cation little alarm was voiced. Then
the trust assumed more aggressive
and domineering attitude, the iron rod
of trust dictation was brought into
play and the trade began to realize
the deadly significance of the COM
bination.
If the Sherman Antitrust law ap-
plies to any combination it applies to
the Harvester Trust. The Sherman
law prohibits and penalties combina-
tons or conspiracies tending to the
restraint of trade or free competition
when doing an interstate business.
Going through the shadow to the sub
stance, as Frank S. Monnett, Ex-At-
torney General of Ohio, says, "this
hits the Harvester Trust nail square
on the head"
Here it is in nutshell. Before the
combination the dealers bought har-
vesting machines from twelve COM
panies in competition. The Harvest
err Trust took at one swoop five of the
largest of these companies out of the
competitive field-gathered in three
more little later, and then when the
Keystone company began to cut
figure in the harvesting machine bust
ness, removed it also by absorption.
So the trust captured nine companies
and claimed in its advertisements to
be controlling and doing 80 per cent
of the harvesting machine business.
Has this combination tended to re-
strict free competition?
A brief history Of the Harvester
Trust may be in place. Its ingenius
devices and subterfuges remind one
forcibly Of Standard Oil methods.
The Harvester Trust is in the shape
OF two corporations. The "Internation-
al Harvester company" is one and
the international Harvester of Ameri-
ca" is the other. This similarity of
names has served to confuse farmers;
the trade; county attorneys; legislat-
ors; attorneys-general, courts, tax as
sessories of state, newspapers and
nearly everybody that tackles the sub
ject
The international Harvester COM
pany" is New Jersey corporation form
ed in the Offices of ]. P. Morgan &
Co. in August, 1907, upon plans and
specifications laid down by Geo. D.
Perkins, before whom the great har-
vester magnates bowed their proud
heads in humble submission. The cap
italization was $12O,0OO,O00, of which
$2O,OOO,OOO was apportioned to the firm
of ]. P. Morgan & Company as a
modest fee for the kindly services of
Mr.. Perkins. 1t may be we'll to state,
in passing, that ]. P. Morgan & Com
pany guarded their interest we'll by
having Mr.. Perkins made chairman
of the finance committee and for the
period Of a year he was the absolute
dictator in the affairs of the corpora
ton while the McCormicks and the
behring's. though actually shorn of
power, were held out to the public and
the trade as the active managers. Mr..
Perkins drilled the magnates so
thoroughly and we'll in that first year
that he has since been able to relax
his vigilance in all but matters of
greater Importance.
This activity of Mr.. Perkins is of
special significance in view of the fact