Omaha daily bee., 1911-11-15
FINE OF $4,000 IS IMPOSED
1t May Resume Business Under Ger
tain Prescribed Conditions.
BROUGHT UNDER STATE STATUTE
This is BROADER Than the Sherman
Antitrust Act.
HISTORY OF THE LITIGATION
Merger Was Made by George w
Perkins ut Request of Cyrus w.
McC Cormck-Thcir Testimony
Aided in Conviction.

JEFFERSON CITY. No. Nov. IA
The supreme court Ct Missouri in an
opinion by Justice Graves today sus-
taincd the decision of Special Commits
sioner Theodore Brace in his finding for
the custer Of the International Harv ester
Company Of America
The court not only ousted the company
from its right to do business in Missouri,
but imposed a fine OF $4,000, conditioned
II the company pays the fine. separates
Itself from the International Harvester
Company of New Jersey files a statement
OF its business and shows to the court
that it will obey the law in the future,
1t can be permitted to continue to do
business in the state
Two Opinions written.
Judges Lamm, Brown. Ferris and Wood
son concurred in the opinion by Judge
Graves. Chief Justice Valiant wrote an
opinion. 1t left me amount of the fine
to be fixed by the court after the COM
pany made a showing that IT would COM
ply with the law in the future. Judge
Graves sustained the position of Special
Commissioner Brace on every contention
The opinion found that competition was
lessened and that practically all of the
harvester business was done by the re-
spondent company in the state. 1t held
that the plan is contrary to the laws
Of the state of Missouri for one company
to conduct the business OF another, as in
this case, the New Jersey company hav-
ing no license to do business in Missouri
Opinion of Judge Graves,
Discussing the case Judge Graves in
his opinion says:
The respondent IN this case was a
part and parcel of this gigantic and
nC4arious scheme For some years It has
been the mere sales agent OF the Inter-
national Harvester company, the New
Jersey company. 1t was licensed in this
state to sell its own goods. but it is now
selling the goods of another.
"As such party to an unlawful arrange
ment or combination II should suffer the
penalties prescribed by our laws.
l. Il have indicated that we could temper
justice with mercy, Ne haze. the right
to absolutely GUST it from the state and
in addition 10 fine it.I think condl-
tonal custer should go and the respondent
be fined in the sum OF $4,000 for its long
and continued infraction Of our laws"
! The court gave the harvester company
until January ], 1912, TO pay the fine of
s5e,OoO, and until March 1, 1912, to with.
draw from the New Jersey company and
to show the court that It is an indie
pendent company and will comply with
the Missouri laws. Failing in this the
custer order will be signed by the court
! Immediately after March l.
History of Suit.
| The International Harvester company
! In September, 1910, was found guilty of
violating the Missouri antitrust laws by
a commissioner appointed by the state
supreme court. The case was submitted
to the supreme court for affirmation last
April The effect of today's decision is
to prevent all the companies which make
up the International from conducting
further business in the state.
The taking OF testimony in tho suit
began In May, 1903, and continued over a
year Judge Theodore Brace Of Paris
Mo, was the special commissioner ap-
! pointed by the state supreme court to
take the testimony in the case. The taxi
! ing of testimony was conducted by Gov
ornor Herbert $. IIadley, then attorney
general. The testimony in the case COW
cred 1,GOO typewritten pages
| One OF the witnesses who testified was
| George w. Perkins Of j. P Morgan e
Co., NcY York. Perkins was the guiding
spirit in the organization of the Inter-
national Harvester company.
The custer suit against the company
was brought under the common law and
the Missouri antitrust law, which are
broader than the sherman antitrust law
The International company was organ
lied I'm 1902. 1t absorbed successfully the
| Mccormick, Deering, Warder Bushnell
CONTINUED on Second Page)