The Birmingham age-herald., 1910-03-11
NEWN BRIEF FILED BY STANDARD O|L Second Group of Attorneys PTe-
 sent Case In Defense TEN SEPARATE POINTS Attorneys'Try to Show That Prices of oil Since the Standard oil Company
 Was Formed Have Not Been
 Unreasonable
TEN SEPARATE POINTS

Washington, March 10--Although 8 was already on file in the supreme court of the United States, second group of the legal talent of the Standard oil com pany today presented to the court de- fense of that organization.
 Today's defenders are three prominent eastern attorneys. Joh G. Johnson of Philadelphia, John G. Milburn and Frank L. Crawford of New York. On Monday the court will hear oral argu- ments on the decree of the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern dis trict of Missouri. dissolving the Standard Oil company of New Jersey.
 Particular stress is laid by counsel on the claim in the brief that the record shows no unreasonable advance in the average prices of the Standard Oil
 Tt appears in fact that there was no increase in their net prices,'' say counsel What the governments position amounts to is that the actual prices for refined oil should have stood still, while all other prices were rising, including the prices of all commodities used in the manufacture of oil, and chiefly the price of labor But suppose it were otherwise; there is no principle of law or of political economy which requires manufacturer to give away a profit which he makes by eco- monies in manufacture.'
 The governments method of estimat- ing the profits the Standard oil has been making is denounced in the brief as Fun sound in law and as contrary to busi- ness principles and the facts of human existence
 Considering only the rate of profit which for seven -19oo-1907-averaged less than 25 per cent on the total net pital invested year by year in the busi- ness that rate of profit is a reasonable one for a great manufacturing business, involving the elements Of risk which characterlze tte oil indusary, specially where, as here, great proportion of the profits is derived from business with for eign countries outside of the protection of American laws and in competition with the manufacturers and merchants of the world"
 This is the explanation given of what is designated as "the remarkable success of the Standard oil business"
 The success of the Standard Oil busi- nes, broadly considered, Is due to ex- traordinary foresight, energy and bold ness and to a policy of investment on an immense scale displayed and carried out in every branch in the petroleum indus try.
 The charge that the Standard Oil com pany through their control of pipe lines, have monopolized the purchase and trans portation of crude oil is declared in the brief to be entirely unsupported by the records
 Two separate groups of counsel have now filed separate briefs in court. and there were rumors today of a difference of opinion between the two groups as to which is the main brief"
 Todays brief is devoted to an attempt to prove 10 points, as follows:
 l. The plants and properties of the Standard companies have always been in a common ownership since their acqui- sition or creation
 9 The Sherman act has no application to the acquisition by the Standard OH company of. New Jersey of the stock of manufacturing or earning or producing corporations.
 g. The contracts. combination and con- spiracies of section 1 of the act are con-
 
 acies which restrict the freedom of the parties or strangers in the conduct of their business.
 f. The acquisition of the stock of the subsidiary companies by the Standard oil company of New Jersey in 1899 was not such a combination or conspiracy in restraint of trade.
 ,. That monopoizing within the second section of the act is the exclusion of others from trade by Illegal means.
 6. The Standard oil company of New Jersey was not monopolizing or attempt ing to monopolize, or combining with anyone else to monopolize when this pro ceedng was instituted.
 T. The ownership of the pipe line sys- tenn has not been a means of monopoliz- ing.
 &. The decree enormously includes and operates upon. several of the appellant companies.
 g.. The sixth section of the decree (dis- banding of the corporation) . Is unwar- ra nted and impracticable in various of it's provisions.
 To- The circuit court had no jurisdic- tion over the appellants.
 Much reliance is placed in the brief on the decision of the supreme court in the famous unsuccessful effort of the govern ment to dissolve the American Sugar Re- finingi company. known as the Knight case.
 NIIIDNEu DIT En