The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1910-03-10
5Dea til to Competitors
{ Means Life to Stand
ard Oil.
.GREATNESSDUErO
CORRUPT METHODS
Department Of Justice Files
Sweeping Indictment Of octo-
pus Nurtured by Rockefeller.
Brief Is Result Of Years
of Governmental Inves-
tigation Of Oil.

> I e L. 4 r. j = t
washington, D. c.. March 9:---"Elth-
er the Sherman act should be rss
pealed or 1t should be enforced in
manner to make the people respect It,"
with this declaration of It's guiding
principle. the Department OF Justice
to-day filed with the Supreme Court
of the United states a 1.00o-page brief
in support OF It's 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 at the
hearing of the case by the Supreme.
Court next Monday. It bears theI
names of Attorney General Wicker
sham and OF Frank B. kellogg,
Charles E. Morrison and Cordenle a.
Severance, as special assistants.
one of the two thick volumes OF the
brief is devoted to an ANALYSIS OF tes.
8timony taken in the Circuit Court OF
the United States for the Eastern DIS DIS
tr!ct Of Missouri. which decreed that.
"standard Or be dissolved. It rep
resents years of governmental lrses1'-
CATION Of the oil business.
,rhe government declares that this
sbows the rebates are discriminatory
received by the Standard Oil COM
pany, not only during its formative
period but during the last ten years,
:.whereby the standard. was enabled TO
nr,nr a large part of the concerns
INTO the comb ination and to crush out
and eliminate from the field OF COM
petition the principal part OF the pal-
ance.'
Its Alleged System.
II Is claimed by the government tnat
II shows a system OF lowering tns
prices, where competitors are dolns
business. below the cost OF the Pro-
duct, while Keeping UP or raising ms
prices In other parts of the country
unt,, the competitor is either elimina1..
ed or his business brought within =.
COMPASS so that the- Standard on
SoTnanv can control 1t; sof obtaining
secret information as to competitive
business, largely through bribing ra y,
way employees, and using that secrel
informatton to procure countermandi
in,,a e orders of. independents and Y
facilitate their system of PRICE cuttins !,
and oppression: OF the use of so-caliet
bogus independents companies, whose nose
Foneratfons are predatory and oppres.
sive "a nrincipal1y used to drive on
competitors and various other means. -. !,
1--WE do not wish to be understopo :
as discourag ging enterprises. says me .re
| government, "or as taking p,,l.N. posi.tot :. :
4 a agatnst legitimate competition. ~ = :
1.-THE Sherman act means any tni,is -
| this country it means inonopoly
cured by such methods of Compel Z
~, this. Unless it Is enforced the
sn,a,, corporation or individual VINO
wishes to engage in business VIII nave
ahso1,telv no opportunity at all.
an many districts the Standard Oh
/ ror,nanv has an absolute monopoly.
| We mean by absolute monoPoly enat
n those districts it does all or the
business. anu has eliminated every
oonmnetitor. Practically this is the
case throughout the Rocky Mountain !,
| country and most of the Paclnc coas1
states. The percentage Of independ-
ent business throughout the entire
southern States Is very snla
4 1t is urged that the intent is cleat 'l
rs monopolizc any! part of the COM
merce OF the United States, the scheme
4 q. void In whatever form the action
1 is taken.
Argument Fallncious.
1 "Thc oft-repeated argument that
4 Ithis construction of the law prevents
1.-The formation of partnerships and the
i legitimate consolidation OF business
l enterprises" says the government. ls !:
4 fallacious. for the reason that such
i 3Iconstruction has no application where
an enterprise is formed with the non,
] est and legitimate intent to pursue
4 n lawful business and not go beyond
4 the bounds of legitimate combination
or directly or substantially suppress
q competition But whenever that ac
ouisition is a mere cloak to cover tn
/ Intention OF moropoltzing commerc'
or for the purpose Of using It as
weapon to strike down competition.
i is illegal. 1t follows from this tha
J, the acquisition OF the same propert!
). might under some circumstances b
) legal, while under other circumstance
! lit would be Illegal"
! The brief replies to. the argument 9
1.-The Standard OIL Company counsel tla
81 tho corporations which entered Int
II the organization in 1S9a were not 9
4 that tme competing with each other
| IF they were not competing
J, says tho government. ut was becaus
Of an unlawful combination in tn
form OF the trust, or during the liqul
dation period, because of tho Sconspl.
S acy OF the individual stockholders. w
3 have said this trust was void. Ger
! tainly the conspiracy between tn
stockholders of these subsidiary cor
J, porations was directly inhibited by tn
Sherman act
Is