Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-11-28
BRIEF PRAYS FOR
DISSOLUTION OF
SUGAR TRUST
Federal Government Proceeds
Against Company Under Sher-
man Anti Trust Law.

NEW YORK, Nov. 2s.-The Federal
government today began n of its
most important actions against great
corporations which are said to have
violated the Sherman antitrust law.
Henry A. Wise, Unised States district
attorney, filed in the United states Dis
trict Court for the southern district OF
New York, a petition asking for the
dissolution of the American Sugar Re-
filming Company and twenty-nine other
corporations which compose the So
called sugar trust. The petition charges
an illegal combination in restraint OF
trade, and asks from the court relief
in whatever form may be necessary,
including a receivership, IL deemed ad-
visable.
The thirty companies composing the
sugar combine have an aggregate CAPT
talization of s230,000. 900 II control a
large percentage of the output of sugar
in this country. The combine is able,
the government alleges. to fix prices
arbitrarily. The petition charges h a
for years the companies ave violated
the law and nave oppressed competitors
and ground them out of existence.
Railroad rebates and customs frauds
are mentioned as devices. which were
employed to raise the combine to the
commanding position which it occupies
today.
The present suit, which it is esti-
mated will be in the courts for two
years before a ina adjudication is
reached, is the result of many weeks or
preparation. District Attorney Wise
made his Investigations under the
direction of Attorney-General Wicker
sham and spent several days in WASH
ington last week in comforting with
the encouragement on the final plans.
The suit is expected to rank in i'm
portance with those of the government
against the Standard Oil Company and
the American Tobacco Company, which
are now pending in the Supreme Court.
Opposed to the government in the
struggle will be some Of the most able
corporation lawyers Of the country.
James M. Beck, former assistant United
States encouragement and now coun-
sci for the American Sugar Refining
Company. will lead the attack on the
governments position.
The fling of the suit was a simple
process. The governments petition, in
printed form, was handed to the Gle k
of the District Court by the district
attorney. Mr.. Wise declined to make
any comment at this time. He said
that the petition had been filed and
that it must speak for itself.
Mr.. Beck said that the sugar con
bine was not a monopoly, but thai If
IT appeared, when the Supreme Court
interpreted the Sherman law in the
tobacco and oil cases, that the sugar
company was In any respect violating
the law, steps would be taken imme-
diately to comply With the law as thus
Interpreted.
THE company's reply to the various
charges will be seen when its formal
answer is filed in court. For the pres
ent it is sufficient to remind the public,
and the. conlpany's stockholders that
the Supreme Court has already de.
clined In a similar proceeding by the
government to hold that this company
was an illegal monopoly under the
Sherman law, and the cou has depre-
Gated the challenging of the Justice
of their ~well-considered and solemn
Judgments The company has no
monopoly In the sugar industry; it pro-
duces no raw sugar and does not and
cannot control the price OF the raw
material; II lar no agreements direct
or implied with other sugar companies
and is subject daily to competition of
the keencst character; it has, including
its beet sugar interests, about 81 per
cent. of the country's sugar trade, and
1t requires q liberal stretch OF the
imagination to call this a monopoly.
1t does not seek to stine competition,
nor oppress the by advance
ing the cost of a necessity of life. It's
refinery profits last year averaged less
than one-sitxh Of a cent per pound.
y Trust Prices.
During the last decade, when the
prices of nearly every necessity OF life
have materially advanced and when the
cost of this company's labor and sup
plies have very largely increased, II has
continued to sell sugar at a lower mar
gin of profit than formerly.
These facts are mentioned because
the officials of this company, while hav-
ing confidence as to the outcome of the
litigation, fear that some of their
stockholders may be led by the present
proceeding into parting with their
shares at a sacrifice.
TT it appears when the Supreme
Court interprets the Sherman law in
the tobacco and Standard Oil cases that
the sugar company is in n respect
violating the Sherman law, steps will
Immediately and voluntarily be taken
TO comply with the law as thus inter-
preted. This would be done if the pres
ent proceeding had never been begun.
The officials of the government are not
more anxious to enforce the law than
the management of this company is to
obey it."