The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1911-07-21

behalf of the company was that the
concern would "be good" in the fu-
ture. They added that they did not
want the company's Minnesota ii.
cense revoked, because that would
mean the loss to Mankato of thriv.
ing industry
Upon Mr.. Simpsons refusal to
agree to modification, on the
ground that he could not interfere
with an order of the court, the Man
kato people threatened him with po-
litical extinction. He remained firm.
however
Claimed 1t Was Combination.
The action was brought against
the company by the attorney general
on the ground that this company and
a number of subsidiary companies
had entered into a combination to
control the price of equipment and
supplies used by diaries.
Request for a new trial was made
and at first denied. When Judgment
was entered against the company in
Steele county the company appealed
again on the ground that the judg-
ment prevented it from doing an in
terstate business and, in view OF the
recent Standard Oil and Tobacco de-
cisions, the company should have
been given time to convert itself into
reasonable trust
Judge Bunn's Decision.
Judge Bum in his opinion says
The decisions of the United States
and Tobacco cases granting time to
the corporations to effect such
changes in their business as would
make it conformable to law, are not
in point. The Sherman act did not
impose the penalty of forfeiture
Iof corporate rights and prosecutions
were not to forfeit such rights, but
to enjoin the acts and dissolve the
combinations that were in restraint
of trade.
The Standard Oil and Tobacco
cases are appealed also to induce us
to apply the rule of reason" to this
case. In other words, we are asked
to hold that our statute should be
construed as forbidding only such
monopoly or restraint of trade as
was illegal in common law. These
decisions do not help defendant II
is expressly stated by Justice O'Brien
in his opinion on the former appeal
that I'VE believe the February agree
ment to have been unlawful under
the common law
The judgment herein does not pre-
vent defendant from doing interstate
business within the borders of this
state. We construe it only forbid
ding defendants continuing it's intra-
state business.
Syllabus of the Decision.
State VS.. Creamery Package Manu-
| featuring company, 10 Mimi, Ais,
adhered to.
Under r. L., 1905, sections 5153,
5169, providing that every foreign
corporation admitted to transact bust
| ness in this state that is guilty of
entering into any pool, trust agree
ment, combination or understanding
in restraint of trade, within this
state, shall thereafter be prohibited
from continuing it's business therein,
the court has no discretion, after the
corporation is found guilty in an ac-
ton begun and conducted under said
sections, to grant any other or diff
ferent judgment than one prohibiting
the corporation from continuing its
business within the state.
The judgment herein does not pro-
hibit defendant from doing an inter-
state business within this state.
The judgment herein is not in vio-
lation of the constitution or laws
of the United States.
Judgment affirmed.
The statement made by The Die.
patch that Mankato people threaten
ed Attorney General Simpson with
political extinction is not founded up
on fact. No threats were made
in an endeavor to have Mr.. Simpson
change his mind.