The Charles Mix new era. (Wagner, Charles Mix County, S.D.) 1???-1911, 1910-03-18
GOVERNMENT SACKS UP PET.
TON THAT OIL TRUST De
DISSOLVED.
ENFORCE OR REPEAL"
y In Many 0istricts.-Standard's
II Argument Met Dy Wicker.
sham and Kellogg.

V~9Suln8IOu, ~. ~. EilHei AAc
Sherman act should be repealed or 1t
should be enforced In q manner to
make the people respect It,"
With this declaration Of its guiding
principle. the department OF justice
nled with the supreme court Of the
United States a thousand page brief
In support Of its petition that Stand
ard Oil" be dissolved as In violation
Of the Sherman antitrust law. The
brief will be the foundation Of the
governments oral argument al the
hearing Of the case by the supreme
court e Monday. 1t bears the
names of Attorney General Wicker
sham and Of Frank b. Kellog. Charles
b. Morrison and Cordenio A. Sever
ance, as special assistants.
One Of the two thick volumes OF the
brief is devoted to an analysis OF tes-
timony taken in the circuit court OF
the United States for the eastern dis
trict of Missouri, which decreed that
STANDARD Or be dissolved. 1t rep
resents years of governmental investi-
cation of the oil business.
The government declares this shows
the rebates and discriminatory rates
received by the Standard Oil combina-
ton. not only during its formative
period. but during the last ten years,
whereby the Standard was enabled
to bring a large part of the
into the combination and to crush out
and eliminate from the field Of com
petition the principal part of the bal
ance."
1t is claimed by the government that
1t shows "a system of lowering the
prices. where competitors are doing
business. below the cost Of the prod
uct. while keeping up or raising the
prices in other parts Of the country
until the competitor is either eliminat-
ed or his business brought within a
compass so that the Standard Oil COM
pany con control it; of obtaining
secret Information as to competitive
business, largely through bribing rail-
way employees and using that secret
information to procure countermand-
ing of orders Of Independents and to
facilitate their system of price cutting
and oppression; of the ISL OF so-called
bogus Independent companies whose
operations are predatory and oppres-
sive, principally used to drive out COM
petitors; and various other means"
I'VE do not wish to be understood
as discouragiIg enterprise" says the
government. "or as taking a position
against legitimate competition, but IL
the Sherman act ear anything in
this country 1t means q monopoly ac-
CURED by each methods of 'competi-
ton as this. Unless 1t is enforced the
small corporation or individual who
wishes to engage In business will have
absolutely no opportunity at ALL"
The oft repeated argument that
this construction Of the law prevents
the formation of partnerships and the
legitimate consolidation of business
enterprises" says the government, lis
construction has no application where
an enterprise is formed with the hon.
est and legitimate intent to pursue a
lawful business not going beyond the
bounds of legitimate combination OF
directly or substantially suppress com
petition. But whenever hat acquisi.
tion is a mere cloak I o cover the in.
tention Of monopolizing commerce or
for the purpose of using it as a wea-
pom to strike down competition, it is
illegal. II follows from this that the
acquisition of the same property
might under some circumstances be
legal while under other circumstances
it will be illegal"
If they We're moi competing says
the government. 1T was because Of
an unlawful combination In the form
Of the trust, Or during the liquidation
period. because of the conspiracy of
the individual stockholders. We have
seen this trust was void. Certainly
the conspiracy between the %stockhold.
ers of these subsidiary corporations
was directly inhibited by the Sherman
act"