The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-03-15
Brilliant Array Of Legal Talent
Appearing for Government and
Defendant Company John
G. Milburn Makes Opening
Argument for Defense.
Reviews Its Growth.r

the decree OF the Circuit Court OF the
United states for the Eastern DIS
itrict OF Missouri. dissolving the Stan-
dard OIL Company of New } jersey as q
conspiracy in restraint of trade and
as a monopoly In violation OF the
Sherman antitrust act
Reviews Company's Growth.
Most OF Dir. Milb,rn's address con-
sisted of review Of the growth of
the Standard OIL Company, with tnsi
object OF laying the foundation for the
claim tina. the corporations entering
into the reorganization OF the Stan
dard OIL Company OF New Jersey in
1890 were non competitive. because for
many years they had been under 4
so-called common ownership
He told OF the tremendous size OF the
business of the STANDARD Oil Company,
and he explained how 1t had grown.
according to his conception. He said
large factors In this growth were the
building OF pipe lines. (which anybody
had right to build. and he described
the building OF rcfinerics and the ex-
teuding of the marketing "a cil:tles
throughout the country and the entire
world. 81 s s e 4
s.lNe. compete road With great cor
[porations,s't said he, that are protested
and shielded by their governments and
conpelledtto combine so that they may
be powerful. We have been able to
meet them because OF our strength.
Towards the close OF the day hese en-
tered upon a discussion OF the Sherman
antitrust act. After the discussion OF
the general meaning OF a monopoly, he
reverted to the alleged monopnllstic
conduct OF the STANDARD OH Company.
Not in Restraint of Trade.
Mr.. aIilburn said he did not believe
the corporation was in restraint OF
trade. sin view Of the common owner
ship. It had never restrained the
Liberties or capital Of any one who has
entered into 1t, nor any one who was
It's competitor. he asserted. Instead Of
being a monopoly. It was urged by.
Mr.. Mi1burn that the amount OF busi-.
ness it was doing was decreasing.
Justice Harlan asked Mr.. Milburn II
he would call an organization OF men
Ito buy all the coal lands in Pennsyl-
vania aSconsplracy in restraint of trade
and monopoly. @
.sThe question you put is one dim
l5cult OF solution" responded the coun-
sci. He explained to the court that
he was really getting "out OF his line
of business" in discussing monopolies.
IT think you are in your line said
Justice White. &: s5 5
Finally Mr.. h1ilburn took up the
charges Of mouopolistic conduct al
lEleged to have been shown by trans
portation Discrimination. He declnred
country would discriminate in favor
/ Of business that afforded only one
IshaIf OF Il Sner8 cent OF the total traffic
Twas preposterous. He said the gov
/ eminent cries OF tremendous discrinli-
! nations in favor Of the Standard OIL
J ] Company refining points and against
the ind pendent refining points was
/ equally ridiculous.
No Complaints Made.
NO independent refinars since i ST.
he added. when the Interstate COM
to the Interstate Commerce Commits
4 sion of a discriminate ions,n.s. iJ$S
He elspoke of the alleged unfair COM
4 petition n" Coplpetition$ does not breed
j the Virtues Said he. "It is tile lower
L mature that, comes uppormos under
such cond Ions. you know. But I'VE
are to be held responsible for all the
4 acts OF our empl oyes,''
Out $8of 81. 900 towns in which the
STANDARD y oilS Comp Sis locat ted, he
A said the records showed complaints OF
5Euntair competition IN tllirty.seven. An
i lsexample Of tho Sc who had complained
4 OF competition, he said, was one ex-
empl ploye. who xplained that he quit
1.-the Standard OIL Company because OF
Hts bad moral inf fluence on business
This man, a 7 was said. took with him
Il ltiles of the Standard Oil Company when
q he Sqpit5 its service. and these les We're
s used by the government In the prepa-
1 Eratlon# OF The case.
d AS to the charge that Standard Oh
men corrupted ia ailroad ofllclals g In order
1 Ito obtain intormati on as to- It's compet--
6litors' business, he asserted that em-
! lployes doing such Id a thing would be
q aIdischarged. Expert 3 nee had taught the
4 STANDARD OIL lie sal Id that IT b had to be
!, mHo,re 4yirtuous than most corporations.
Z When tho court adjourned he
81 q ~ N1r.; Iilhurn was Ia eclaring that AZ
& complaints by Ind pend Tents had ever
{ |lbeen mad 8 OF the standard g controls q
Il sIitsatrunk pipe Ines, y II ID he court
! no would conclud a hi remarks In q about
|iten minutes to .lno rro S8
! Wcdiing Day Fixed.
q $SSs N ewS orlS. March 4,--1 hecar1,
a known4 to I'd hat he dat e On Til,
4 wedding IN cod ore r sew q ] !,
a aud NJ hlIss ~ MI an or laXan ander sllal
a been 70 ca faF n ne y dat II
IL son IA gt hn q ltenY Ia III hy4 Co nr q