The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-05-30


procuring a remedy which would he con
plete and efricacious. and vet result
as little injury as possible both 10 Il
house and 10 the private interests il
volved.
The Courts Solution.
The court believed that putting Il
matter in tho hands OF the lower cou
for the purpose Of working out a methc
of dissolution and recreation, with tl
understanding that unless the law ws
complied with, the combination must rt
tire from Interstate commerce or 20 int
the hands OF receiver, was the be;
solution OF the problem.
Unlike the Standard OIL compan
which made no move for rehearini
William r. Perkins. as counsel for IL
American Tobacco company, asked II
court after the announcement OF the dc
cision, for leave 10 present a petition an
TO stay the issuance Of the mandate
the court for thirty days. The reque'
was granted. Shortly afterward the cou
adjourned TO next October.
Opinion of Chief Justice.
Chief Justice Whites opinion may
be grouped into three parts:
First, he gave a detailed statement
of the history of the case and dwell
upon what he designated as tho "un-
disputed facts next he took mp the
meaning OF the sherman antitrust
at bar. and lastly he considered the
remedies TO be applied.
Al tho outset he classified the
siXty-five American corporate defend
ants into three groups. The Ameri
It's dominant relation 10 the subject
matter OF the controversy" was des-
ignated as "the primary defendant"
The American SNUFF company, the
Anne rlcan Cigar company the Ameri-
can Stosic company, MacAndrews e.
Forbes company and the Conley Foil
company were named as accessory
defendants
porations were donominsted tic
Subsidiary defendants"
The two English corpora tions. the
Imperial Tobacco company and the
as we'll the twenty nine individual
defendants. headed by James b.
Duke, remained unclassihed.
The undisputed facts" were di-
vided INTO Two periods. the one being
from the time OF the organization OF
the FIRST, or Old American Tobacco
company in 1890. 10 the organization
of the Continental Tobacco company
in 1898 and the other being from the
date of that organization to the be-
ginning OF the case under review
Organization Described.
The chief Justice dwelt at length
upon the organization Of the old
airy. 1890, just before tho Sherman
anti trust law was passed. He de-
Scrlbed the organization OF the Amer
lean Tobacco company 10 carry on
business of FIVE distinct concerns
which at that time were manufactur-
ing % per cent OF the domestic Gig
arettes produced in the United
states Prior 10 the organization the
chief justice said the five concerns
had been engaged in fierce and alb
normal compe petition.
He told with much detail how the
American Tobacco company expand
ed. BY the end of 1891. he said, the
company had become a factor i'm all
branches of the tobacco business.
Specific instances OF contracts being
entered into 10 prevent persons who
sold out to the American Tobacco
company from re-entering the tobacco
business for ten TO twenty years were
cited. The expansion proceeding he
said, the American Tobacco company
between 1891 and 1898 acquired ff-
teen growing tobacco concerns doing
business in Kentucky. Louisiana,
Maryland. Michigan. Missouri. New
York: North Carolina and Virginia.
The organization of the Continental
Tobacco company was next described
There is no dispute" says the
chief Justice. that as carly as 1898
that the president of the American
Tobacco company by authority OF the
corporation approached leading man
bld'lule OF plug tobacco and sought
TO bring about a combination OF the
plug tobacco interests and upon fail
ure TO accomplish this, ruinous com
petition by lowering the price of
plug tobacco below. it's cost followed
As result OF this warfare, which
continued until 1898, the American
Tobacco company sustained severe
losses aggrcgatinS more than
$4,000. 900.
Result of Tobacco War.
The warfare produced its natural
result. not only because the company
ACQUIRED during the last two years
of the campaign, as we have stated.
control Of important plug tobacco
concerns. but others engaged In that
indGus.ry I,G came to sot terms We say
with several leading plug manufac-
turers the American Tobacco COM
pany organized a New Jersey corpor-
alton styled the Continental Tobac-
featuring. with capital of s75,-
100000; after increased 10 sl00, ,O00,-
600.
"The new company issued its
stock" the chief justice said, ''and
took transfers to the plants, assets
and businesses of FIVE large and sue
cessful plug manufacturers. The
American Tobacco company trans
ferred To it It's plug business and
American Tobacco company. also
became president of the Continental
company"
The second period. or that follow
ing the organization OF the Contl-
mental Tobacco company, was de-
scriDcd next or these years Chief
Justice White said:
In 1898 and thereafter, either the
American or Continental companies.
for cash or stock. at an aggregate
cost OF fifty million OF dollars bought
and closed up some thirty compet-
ing corporations and partnerships
heretofore engaged in interstate and
foreign commerce manufacturers,
sellers and distributors OF tobacco
and related commodities, the inter-
ested parties covcnanting not 10 en-
gage in the business.
Like wise the two corporations ac-
. 0uired for cash. by issuing stock and
otherwise, control Of any competing
corporations. now growing concerns
with plants in various states. Cuba
and Porto Rico. which manufactured,
bought. sold and distributed tobacco
out the United States and foreign
countries and took from the parties
in interest covenants not TO engage
In the tobacco business"
Not only did the American and
Continental Tobacco companies con-
tlnue TO acquire other companies
but the chief Justice referred TO the
other companies as acquiring still
more companies.
Plants Bought, Then Closed.
''It is OF the utmost importance. =
said the chief justice. ito observe