New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-05-16

tons I'm exchange for its certificates gave
TO the corporation an enlarged aud more
psrfect sway and control over the trade
and commerce in petroleum and its PROD
ucts. The effect OF this. Chief Justice
| White said the lower court held, was 10
destroy the Potentially OF competition
which otherwise would have existed to
such an extent as 10 he combination or
! conspiracy in restraint Of trade in viola
ton of the first section of the act and also
be an attempt TO monopolze and a monop-
olization bringing about perennial violation
o. tho second section.
we see no cause 10 doubt the correct
ness Of these conclusions said the Cher
Justice. considering the subject from every
aspect. that is. both in view of the tacts
established bv the record and the neces-
sary operation and effect Of the law as We
have construed Il upon the differences
deducible from the facts for the following
reasons.
a Because the unidcation of power and
control over petroleum and its products,
which was the inevitable result OF the
| combining in the New Jersey corporation
bv the increase of its stock ana the trans
fer To it Of the stocks Of so many other
corporations dgSregdtlnS so vast d cal
tai gives rise, in and of itself IN the dp-
sence Of countervaling crcuiiis anCeS, ~
say the least. to the prima facic presump-
ton Of intent and purpose To maintain inc
dOminancy over the oil INDUSTRY, nor AZ II re-
/ suit OF normal methods OF industrial deNei-
oument but by new means Of combination
| which were resorted TO In order thdt SreaI-
er power might be added than Wouid otheI-
! wise have arisen had normal inethodS perH
| followed the whole with the purpose OF en-
GLIDING others from the trade ana mus
| centralizing In the combination PerPeIn,
| al control OF the movements OF petroleum
and it's products In the channels ot III
! terstate commerce. ,,.;
Of intent TO restrain trace, 20 HlUHup s,,i,
and 20 bring about monopolization result
| ing from the act OF expanding the STOCK or
the New. Jersey corporation and vestlng IL
| with such vast control of the OIL lnGus1ME,
Is made conclusive by considering: l. The
conduct OF the persons or corporations
who were mainly instrumental III ~ ~
ing about the extension OF power III tne
| New Jersey corporation before the con-
| summation of that result ana prior 70 , 60
formation OF the trust asreelheu.s p, a. 20 ~
and 1852: .. BY. considering the PROOF Do te
! what was done under those agreements
and the acts which Immediately pr1ceucou,
the vesting OF power III the Ne% The
modes in which the power vested III tnat
! CORPORATION has been exerted and the re-
suits which have arisen from II.
Standard oil Methods Denounced
In subiecting to scrutiny the acts OF 'he
Standard Oil Company in the lonS distant
past for the purpose Of getting assistance
in discovering intent and purpose 'H.el
Justice White made cutting remark. hs
said
We think no DISTINGUISHED mind can
survey the period IN question "'tnou'
beina rresistbiy driven TO the eonclui
sion that the very genius tor commerce.,
development and organization WhIon "
would seem was nnanitesteo from 'ne
beuinnjnu soon begot an intent and pur-
nose 10 exclude others, which was ire
cuentlv manifested by acts and dealings
uhoIIv Inconsistent with the theory that
they were made with the single cohcep
ton Of advancing the development o,
business power by usual methods, but
,.h;ch. on the contrary. necessarily m
viewed the intent to drive others from
the field and TO exclude them from tne'r
rioht 70 trade, and thus accomplish inc
mastery. which was the end IN view -,
Ard, considering the period from the
date Of the trust agreements OF lols ano
1882. up to the time OF the expansion o,
the New Jersey corporation, the gradual
e.tension OF the power over the COM
rerce in oil which ensued. the decision
of the Supreme Court Of Ohio. the tardi'
ness or reluctance IN conforming 10 the
mmands Of that decision, the method
first adopted. and that which finally Gull
minated in the plan Of the New Jersey
oorporation, all additionally serve 10
axe manifest the continued cxstence
| Of the intent which we have previously
indie ated. and which among other things
ir.peIled the expansion OF the New Jer.
sey corporation.
The exercise CT the power which re-
suited from that organization fortItes the
foregoing conclusions, since the develop
rent which came. the acquisition here
and there which ensued Of every efficient
means by which competition could have
been asserted. the slow but resistless
methods which followed By which means
Of transportation were absorbed ano
brought under control. the system OF
marketing which was adopted. by when
TIE country was divided into districts
and the trade in each district in oil was
turned over to a designated corporation
within the combination and all others
were excluded, all lead the mind up to
conviction Of purpose and intent when
we think is so certain as practically TO
cause the subjec not to be Withn the
domain Of reasonable contention.
The inference that no attempt 10 monop
ollie could have been intended, and that
no mOnopolZati0n resulted rom the acts
complained OF, since II rs established mar
a very small percentaee of ne crude OH
produced Was controlled bv the colnhna-
ton e. unwarranied As substantial power
over the crude product was the inevitable
result Of the absolute control which existed
over the refined product. the monopo1za-
ton Of the ono carried with n the power
10 control the other. and " the inference
which This situation suggests were dcvcl-
oped. which We deem II unnecessary 20 do.
ihe1 might vel serve 10 add additional
cogency 10 the presumption Of intent 10
InonoTGliZe which We have found arises
from the unquestionel proof on other sub
iect-.
The Chief Justice at one point in his opin-
ion tool; NJ some of the contentious Of tho
defendants. particularly that based on the
famous knight case. criticised last fall by
President Roosevelt This contention was
that the Sherman antitrust law could not
be applied Ia the Standard oil. because 10
do so would be 10 extend the power Of Con-
gress to subjects teyond the reach OF ~
authority 10 regulate interstate commerce
by enabling that body 10 deal with mere
questions Of production OF commodities
within the states
Ihe chief Justice said that this conten-
non a. to the holding OF the knight case
Wa unsound, ana required no express no.
,l'e neN ond that given It IN cases already
decided
Inc court then considered The arguments