The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1911-11-02

OF the law to disband and 70 forbid
them by oneness OF ownership 10 per-
pctuate the monopoly they have ere
ated. viii cause no alarm To stock
holders I'm corporations that are do
Ing u legitimate business. This fs the
crucial question to be settled by this
court, and the answer to this question
VIII determine whether under existing
law relief can be awarded "coter-
minious with the ultimate redress Of
the wrongs which are found to exist"
An Arbitrary Distinction.
n fundamental error in the plan
proposed by the American Tobacco
Company is that in determining where
the ultimate control OF the several
companies Will reside, il distinguishes
between the common stock held
by the twenty-nine individual defend
ants and that held by other individuals
not named as parties in this cause
Ihis distinction is wholly arbitrary
The court finds that the cOmbina-
ton as a whole involving all its CO.
operating or associated parts in what
ever form clothed, constitutes a re-
straint Of trade within the first sec
ton and an attempt to monopolize or
monopolizauon within the second
section OF the an trust act" This
finding reaches e Y common stock
holder and taints very share of the
common stock with the vice Of illegal
lty. II the twenty individual de-
whole company, they should be put
into class and company all to them
selves and the other companies should
be left free from their unwhoIesome
influence.
We furthermore submit that th.re
are no insurmOuntable difficulties in
the way Of an actual division of the
assets OF the American Tobacco Com
pany and the formation Of new cor
porations having no connection with
Al hAr IN, 49,
troll. he genius that could triumph
over bitter riValriss, over international
pride and prsjudicss and reduce o
thousand warning clements to a com
pact harmonious unit, would ind il
cas- TO accomplish an equitable parti-
ton II it would concentrate it's en-
SrgiSs upon that task. Vast estates
and Kingdoms have been and are con-
stantly partitionsd. The principles Of
owSlty OF partition and in some in
stances OF sales for division could be
justly invoked in q serious effort to
comply with mandate Of the court.
Unwilling to Find Right Way.
The difficulty OF an equitable par
tition lies not so much in the inability
as in the unWillingness to make one.
In its petition filed herein the tobacco
company says, upon oath, that the as
sets or the company can be fairly dis
tributed among fourteen companies.
This is a complete answer to the sug-
gestD1 that an actual equitable par
tition is impracticable. Give TO the
fourteen companies proposed the ele-
ments of complete independence; for
bid the stockholders in any one OF
these companies from owning stock
in any OF the others and perpetually
enJoin them from acquiring such
stock, and condition will be created
III compliance with the judgment of
the court. If a holds fourteen shares
OF common stock of the American
Tobacco w n
sity for allOting to him a single snare
IN fourteen different CORPORATIONS
Why not give him his entire HOLDINGS
in single company? Possibly he
would then have some incentive TO
give some attention to the manage
ment of his company.
Vest Control in Twenty mine Men.
The necessary and doubtless sought
for result of distributing the holdings
of each individual among a large
render Indifferent the $500 small
stockholders and leave the real con-
troll OF all the companies in the hands
OF the twenty-nine individual defend
ants and few other individuals not
named as defendants. but who have
always been allied with or under the
control of the twenty-nine.
But if the difficulties in The way Of
a real dissolution Of the combination
and a real destruction Of the monop-
oily are SO great that they cannot be
overcome, then let there be a candid
confession of that fact and let the
Supreme Court make such further or
ders as indicated in its opinion that
the eXigencies of the situation may re-
quire. The present status is more
tolerable than the plan proposed 10y
the trust for if this plan shall re-
Ceive judicial sanction henceforward
the trust will carry the law as an asset
instead of n liability. henceforward
the trust will do in the name OF the
law what il has heretofore done in
its fear. If the law is powerless to
save. il can at least refuse TO sanction
evil.
All of which is respectfully submit
ted for the consideration of this hon
orable court.