Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-12-12
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE OIL
CASE,

CASE.
Chicago Evening Post: Senator
Nelson w. Aldrich of Rhode Island
has been quoted within the week as
declaring that the pane of 1907 cost
the people of the United States two
bllons of dollars; and yet we are de-
scribed as a nation of traders! Eco
nomic conditions did not warrant the
disastrous days of two years ago,
but an astounding fine imposed by
federal court Enthusiastically
reversed by higher court-precipi-
tated crisis. An inadequate finan-
cial system and a sentimental and
misguided public opinion did the
rest.
Today the shadow of the recent
decision of the federal court of the
District of Missouri in the case of thu
Standard Oil Company Of, New Jer-
sey obsesses the business life Of the
nation. Despite the fact that the
great railroad systems of the con-
tinent are breaking traffic records
week by week; regardless of the an
nouncement of the Secretary of Az
riculture that the value of our farm
products for 1909 reaches the enor-
nous total of $3.50 ,O00, 000-a gain
over 1908 of $S6s9, o 90, 00O-capital
grows timid, investors hesitate and
merchants pause.
The situation is anomalous, unwar-
ranted, absurd 1t threatens every
citizen of the United States-wage-
Garner, capitalist, professional or
business man. Let us confront con-
ditions fairly and squarely as they
are. What has passed is done. The
business ethics of a century that is
history concern us only as history.
The adroit and effective exposition
of the early activities of the resource
full men who created the Standard Oil
Company, given to the, public through
Miss Ida Tarbell's articles in a: mag
azine making a strenuous bid for pub
lie favor, constitutes about all that
the average man knows Of that great
corporation. 1t is not the purpose
of the Evening Post here to discuss
the merits of that opinion as to la
the merits of that notable series of
articles. And yet public opinion as
to the purpose and effect of the re-
cent court action is based to a great
extent on a more or less vague rec
objection of what Miss Tarbell wrote.
What possible application Las 1t 70
the case in hand?
The recent decision of the federal
court did not go into the question of
whether the Standard accepted re-
bates or whether it exactcG more
favorable treatment from the rail-
= roads than other corporations. 1t
decided only that the Standard Oil
Company in its methods of doing
business today is not conforming to
the Sherman antitrust law, and it is
so instructed by the court, and will
have to change its method Of doing
business as corporation or holding
company unless the supreme court
of the United States reverses the de-
cision of the lower court.
Commenting on the courts decis-
ion Mr.. William Rockefeller said:
::3'It seems to me desirable, not only
for our interests and those of our as
;sociates. but also for the public at
large, and. for all other great bus
ltness ventures, that the Sherman act
SHOULD be, finally set beyond conten-
stion as interpreted by the supreme
court of the United States. I'm
sdoubtedIy our case will be appealed,
and for the foregoing reason" Mr..
Rockefeller further said that no mat
ter what the decision Of the United
States Supreme Court on the appeal
from the findings Of the lower court
might be, there would be no ,unwil-
Iingness on the part Of the. Standard
OIL company to comply fully not only
with the letter, but also with the
spirit, OF the law.
Should the supreme court uphold