The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-01-13
Standard Oil Is Fight
ing for It's Very
Existence.
MILBURN GIVES
TRUST HIS1OR Y
Attorney Tells Supreme Court
That Company Never Pur-
chased Property of COMPETE
tors With Intent to Re-
strain Interstate Trade.
Praises Rockefeller.

OIL attorneys to-day argued before the
Supreme Court of the United States
against the proposed dissolution of the
Standard Oil Company, of New Jersey.
as violativc of the Sherman antitrust
law. For three hours John 6. Milburn,
of New York. addressed the court. TO-
morrow Frank Il. Kellogg. Of Min
nesota. will present The governments
side OF the controversy The argu-
nents Will not be concluded until next
Tuesday
Mr. Milburn cndeavorcd to show
what alleged wrongs the afirmance of
the dissolution decree of the lower
court would incur.
In his history OF chaotic conditions
IN the oil business between 1880 and
1870, due, Mr.. Wilburn saiu. to an over
production OF refining capacity Mr.
Milburn introduced to the court the
character of John p. Rockefeller.
Due Ia IsockcfeIIcr's Genius.
There was out there I'm Cleveland ..
saiu he. a young man in the early
sixties with small amount of money.
which he mad saved, who possessed
the gift OF genius. lie had the genius
Tor business, and there is genius for
business Just as there is a genius for
war or poetry, or painting. That man
was John ID. Rockefeller. lie saw that
ms oNerproduction of rehneries was
10 DC met by volume of business SO
as to Withstand the lower profits"
lie then told how Rockefeller allied
himself with Andrews, a practical oil
rehner. and how. with the exercise OF
tocketeiler's genius for business and
their consequent good standing among
hnanciers, they grew rapidly.
Mr. MilhurH dwelt particularly upon
the period of acquisition which, he
Shld. closed in 1879, the trust agree
ment of 1892 and the new arrangement
of ownership In 1899 Acquisitions
never had been made. Mr. Milburn told
Tue court, with an intent to restrain OF,
to monopolize interstate trade Most
oil the purchases were made, he said.
before 1879.
We thought that it was only the
decent thing 10 do If a man mo to
us said MIR. Milburn. with a promo
sit'on 10 sell OUT, TO buy his plant at
us appraised value. often IL was prac-
tioally worthless, and we could have
permitted il to go to dry rot in his
hands,
lie denied the charges OF the gov
eminent mat Standard Oil had the ad-
Vantages of such preferences from the
railroads during the period of acouisi
ZION, that IL should now he punished
The contracts between the railroads
ana he standard We're not in restraint
OF trade. he contended. when viewed
IN the henr or the uays in which they
were made"
His remarks about the organization
OF the Standard Oil COMPANY of Nav
Jersey IN 1883. which is the thing
which The decree of the lower court
would undo. were summarized by Jus
tice Hughes
Summarized by Hughes
The net result" suggested Justice
hughes, rs that the Standard OIL
Company. of New Jersey, after 1899
stood IN the place of the trustees. and
those who held the certificates issued
by the trustees thereafter held tho
stock OF the Standard Oil Company OF
New Jersey?'
Is quite simple when you understand
H. You see, there was the same BODY
OF common owners of the property. both
before and after 1899
At this point he referred to the ar
Sument of The STANDARD. upon which II
Is pinning its faith in the present con-
troversy, that the new arrangement of
lS'? did not suppress competition in
any way, because the properties before
1929 We're not competing. they being
owned by the same persons
one objection 10 the decree which
Mr.. Milburn voiced was that by COM
peliins the standard of New Jersey TO
give tic each of its stockholders n pro-
portionate share in each of the corpo-
rhttons whose stock ii held the small
holders OF stock would be seriously
embarrassed For instance, the man
who owned ono share of stock in the
a
scrip for IS cents worth of stock in
one company and $3.50 worth In an
other. This would not he markctablc
he suggested. Furthermore he made
the statement that the decree would
be ruinous to many nj the properties.
because the companies had no indie
pendent existence.