Omaha daily bee., 1907-05-25
AITACkON STANDARD
Government seets 70 Fave OIL Combine
Declared Unlawful,
s1T Bi6NS IN ST. PAUL COURT
Bill Alleges CODsp raoy on Fart Of Rookie
feller, Rogers, ct al.
COMPANY FILES BILL or EXCEPTIONS
1t Seeks to Eliminate All Alleged Acts
Prisr 70 1899.
GREAT ARRAY CF LAWYERS ATTENDING
kellogg, Purdy and Morrison Appear
for the Government-JohnSo
MiIburn and Priest Repre-
sent Defense.
II Seeks to Eliminate All Alleged Act
Prisr 70 1899
GREAT ARRAY oF LAWYERS KTTENONI

CT PAUL. May 24-Not since the last
aEs uIIeuts were made in the famous North
Cln securities case in the United States
circuit court here about three years ago
Las there been 80 noted an array Of lawyers
as Appeared in that court at 10 o'clock to-
day In the case Of the United States against
tie Standard Oil company OF New Jersey
and ~ allied corporation. Judges San
born, Vandevcntcr, Hook and Adams were
Oh the bench and the mater brought for
sL,ir consideration was a bill Of exceptions
filed by the Standard Oil company against
the government complaint which seeks TO
,lave the Standard Oh company and its
twenty other companies declared an unlaw-
g4l combination I'm restraint Of trade and
20 have the combination dissolved.
Frank r Kellogg Of this city represents
the government and he made the principal
argument. He was ASSISTED by NJ. D.
Purdy. assistant United States assistant
attorney. and c. Z. Morrison Of Chicago.
The Standard on company was repre-
sonted by John T. Johnson Of Pittsburg,
John c. Mn5urn Of New York.
Goes Into History of Company.
The complaint which was fled a number
Of months ago in St Louis, Gets up well
kn5NE allegations against the company
various ofrenses. which it IS alleged the com
rauv has committed. The complaint begins
with the inception OF the trust; shows the
relations which John D. Rockefeller, H n
Rogers and others Of the Standard oil group
bore to each other prior to 1899, when the
Standard OIL company was organized as
holding company; shows how these men
rrlor 10 that date held the stock Of sub
s.diary and related companies as trustees
and shows how IN 1899 the Standard OIL
company was formed as q holding COM
panN 70 take over the subsidiary and related
companies for the express purposes Of
carving on the methods Of business which
had been developed by Rockefeller. Rogers
and the others as trustees.
The purpose ofthe bill OF exceptions is
70 narro,g the issue in the case TO charges
aEqpst the Standard oil company, which
80 back not further than 1899, when the
S-rrvany was organized. The company
lnles exceptions and objects to all those parts
~ the complaint that show the original
IaHsacd conspiracy Of the Standard of trust
! which preceded the organization Of the
Standard oil holding company.
standard Files Objections.
The bill OF exceptions makes something
like fifty objections TO the complaint, the
purpose Of an Of which is TO narrow the
issue by eliminating all parts Of the com
plant that refer 70 the business methods Of
Iao5kefeIlcr. Rogers and the others as
trustees prior 70 1889.
TIE ruling OF the Judges on the bill Of
executions win not determine the final out
come Of the governments case, but the
Judges will determine whether the com
plant shall stand as filed or whether II
shall be amended in any particular, as de-
ruanded by the Standard oil attorney. II
the decision Of the judges Is with the gov
crnmcut then the case viii proceed along
the lines heretofore outlined By Mr.. KslloEE.
NJ Morrison and Mr.. Purdy. II the con-
tentIons set forth by the Standard oil at
torneys in the bill OF exceptions are up
held IN any or sall particulars, then II viii
be necessary to amend the complaint to
conform with the ruling OF the court.
In either event the next step In the fight
AGAINST the Standard Oil trust will be the
taking OF testimony in substantlation of
ALLEGATIONS set forth in the complaint
Attorney John G. Johnson began his at
tack on the governments position by read
ing what he termed impertinent matter in
tho bill Of complaint. He said the govern
rncnt charged the Standard OIL company
with committing acts which were long in
2 past, OF which the court could have no
cognizance. Mr.. johnson asked that all
citations and copies OF contracts or other
agreements entered into by the Standard
pr, 10 1873 be stricken from the bin.
Attorney p F. Kellogg for the CON-
plairant coutended that the orig' al form
of the standard Oh trust agreement was
sun kept alive by the present organiza-
tion ana IN order 70 show that the sher-
man antitrust act was violated It was nec-
esSarv TO show up the history % the com
pany from the beginning. as II was al
bad now as II was IN the beginning.
Trust Dominated by One Head.
The trust agreements extend from one
cowpary to another" he said They
show tNat the original Standard on trust
witch was declared illegal was dominated
by the same president, the same directors
the same board OF trustees and operated
IN restraint OF trade. and Is monopoly
ans known as the Standard Holding cor
roratiou, which Is but a subtcrfuge. Ar'
We not going 10 be allowed to tell rs
whole history? Must we hx a date and
chop of our allegations there and be al
lowed 20 go no further back than 1870? Il
that Is 70 be our limit we might tust AZ
wen stop and say the Standard Holding
corporation exists and ,et It go al that
We allege it is all one conspiracy; tha'
the defendant got control Of the OF in
turtIs o- Ni-is SoAItIys OF me 4aliroau ter
minals by contract and that Il gave re
bates. crushed competition and Is a mo
\ nOpoly. Are We not 10 be allowed 10 show
how these contracts carry over from on.
company % anothcrY II Is more impor
taut 10 US 20 show the means used 20 crusi
out q competitor before 1879 than Il is a,
the present time II IS said that the trust
docs not exist now. Il does not need 1,
exist now.
The contracts entered into, the rebate.
given. the control OF terminals of railroad
gained. an tended toward q complete con
vol Of the Oh business. 50 that al prssen
81 Is not necessary 10 maintain a trust in
vr..effr-rrt,v -