The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1910-03-12
THREE DAYS TO
ARGUE CASE Of
STANDARD. OIL
Counsel Will Ask for the Same
Time Given to Tobacco
Trust Case
SITUATION IS MOST SERIOUS
STANDARD OIL HAS EVER FACED

II the Decision of the Lower Court Il
Sustained 1t Means the Dissolution
Of the Trust Company-Brilliant Ar.
ray of Counsel.
Washington, March 12.-Three en-.
tire days probably will be given by
the supreme court of the United States
hearing arguments in the Standard
Oil dissolution suit beginning Mon
day. Counsel have agreed to ask for
that much time and in view of the fact
that three days were given for argu-
ment of the tobacco antitrust suit,
it is believed the court will consent
to all equal period for the oil case.
This is the most serious legal bat
tie that Standard Oil has ever con-
fronted. The supreme court of
the United States will hear ar
guments on the appeal OF the Standard
Oil company Of new Jersey from the
adverse judgment of the United States
circuit court for the eastern district
OF Missouri, which ordered the disso-
luton of the New Jersey corporation
as an illegal combination and 'monop-
oily in restraint of interstate COM
merce. To point out the alleged err
rors of the circuit court in its find
ings and in its decree, the keenest
intellects within command have been
procured. To argue for the affirmance
OF the decision OF the lower court, Mr..
Wickersham, the attorney general Of
the United States himself will head
brilliant array Of counsel for the
government.
The circuit court announced grave
findings against the seven individual
defendants, John D. Rockefeller, Will
liam Rockefeller. Henry M. Flagler.
Henry H. Rogers, John d. Archibold,
Oliver H. Payne and Charles M. Pratt.
the Standard Oil company Of New
Jersey and other defendant comps-
Mes s9>i'yti2;,ti, - :, ,+,.-.a
The court found that in 1899 by an
Of stock by the seven indi-
viduals. the Standard Oh company Of
New Jersey acquired the legal. titlt
to a majority of the stock of nineteen
companies, which in turn controlled
a large number of others, all but one
engaged In the oil business.
What it found as to this combina-
tion was that:
That since 1899 the affairs of all
these companies have been managed
by the principal company as the busi-
ness of single person, SO as to fix
for them the price of crude oil, the
rates for transportation and the SELL
ing prices of it's products.
That the par value of the combined
capital stock in 1899 was about $780,
600. 900, and that in 1903 it was $780,
100000.
That twelve of these companies
owned 54,565 miles of pipe lines.
That six of these companies had
1914 selling stations throughout the
United States.
That these companies from 1899 to
1907 produced more than one-tenth Of
the crude oil obtained in this coun-
try.
That they owned and operated more
than one-half of all the tank cars
used to distribute its products.
That they manufactured more than
three -fourths of all the crude oil re-
fined in the United States.
That they transported more than
four-fifths of the petroleum derived
from the Pennsylvania and Indiana
oil fields.
That they marketed more than four
fifths of all the Illuminating oil sold
in the United States.
That they exported more than four
fifths of all the naphtna sold in the
United States.
That they sold more than nine
tenths of all the lubricating oil sold
to railroad companies in the United
States.
Illegal Combination.
On this finding the court decreed:
That the organization of 1899 was a
combination or conspiracy in restraint
of interstate commerce in petroleum
and its products. such as the first
section of the Sherman antitrust act
declares is illegal; that the seven in
dividual defendants. the Standard OIL
company of New Jersey and thirty
nine other companies had entered into
a combination or conspiracy to mon
0polize and had In fact monopolized a
substantial part Of interstate COM
merce in violation of the second sec
tion of the Sherman antitrust act;
that thirty-three other companies ac-
cused were proven not to be in this
combination.
The court enjoined the principal
company and its directors from exer-
cising any control over the subsidiary
companies; it enjoined the subsidiary
companies from declaring or paying
any dividends to the principal COM
many, but not from distributing ratab-
" to the share holders of the princi-
pal company the stock Of the sub
sidiary company; 1t enjoined these
found to be in the illegal combina-
tion" from continuing in 1t or form
ing a new combination by means Of
aggre CATION OF the physical properties
IN the hands of one member of the
combination. and forbade those in the
,...otsor Rrn,,o ON ON 02n0 In inter.