Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1911-05-16

dSSreEatlnS so vast capital, give rise,
in and of itself in the absence of
countervailing circumstances. to say
the least, to the prima facie presump-
ton Of intent and purpose to maintain
the dominancy over the oil industry,
not as result of normal methods of
Industrial development, but by means
OF combination, which were resorted
to In order that greater power might
be added than would otherwise have
arisen had normal methods been fol-
lowed. the whole with the purpose of
excluding others from the trade, and
thus centralizing in the combination
a perpetual control of the move
ments OF petroleum and its products in
the channels of interstata commerce.
"B-Because the prima facie pre-
sumption of intent to restrain trade,
to monooplize and to bring about
what was done under those agree
of expanding the stock of the New
Jersey corporation and vesting ii with
such vast control of the oil industry
is made conclusive by considering:
% The conduct of the persons OF
corporations who We're mainly instru-
mental in bringing about the extension
of power in the New Jersey corpora
tion before the consummation OF that
result and prior to the formation OF
the trust agreements of 1873 and 1852.
(2) by considering the proof as to
wha twas done under those agree
ments and the acts which Immediately
preceded the vesting of power in the
New Jersey corporation, as well as by
Weighing the modes in which the pow
er vested in that corporation has been
exerted and the results which have
arisen from it,
In subjecting to scrutiny the acts
and doings of the Standard Oil com
pany in the long distant past for the
purpose of getting assistance in dis
covering intent and purpose, Chief
Justice White left a cutting remark:
I'VE think no disinterested mind
can survey the period in question
without being irresistibly driven to
the conclusion that the very genius
for development and organization
which ii would deem was manifested
from the beginning soon begot an in
tent and purpose to exclude others,
which was frequently mani ested by
acts and dealings wholly inconsistent
with the theory that they were made
with the single conception of advanc-
ing the development of business pow
er bv usual methods, but which on
the contrary necessarily involved the
intent to drive others from the fie/
and to exclude them from their rights
TO trade, and thus accomplish the
mastery which was the end in view.
And considering the period from
the date of the trust agreements of
1879 and 1882 up to the time of the
expansion of the New Jersey corpora
ton, the gradual extension of the
power over the commerce In oil which
ensued, tha decision of the supreme
court of Ohio, the tardiness of reluct-
ance in conforming TO the commands
OF that decision the method first
adopted and that winch finally cdl-
minated in the plan of the New Jersey
corporation, all additionally served to
mako manifest the continued exist
ence of the intent which we have pre-
viously indicated, and which, among
other things, impeled the expansion
of the New Jersey corporation
THE exercise of the power which
resulted from that organization forti-
fios the foregoing conclusions since
the development which came, the ac-
UulslIluH IltIt anu litlt W iiNi Rho'NN
of every efficient means by which
competition could have been asserted,
the slow put resistless methods which
followed Ly which means of trans
portation were absorbed and brought
under control, the system of market
ing which was adopted by which the
country was divided into districts ana
the trade in each district in oil was
turned over to a designated corporA-
tion within the combination and NJ
others were excluded, all lead the
mind up 10 a conviction OF purpose
and intent which we think is so GER
tain as practically to cause the sub
ject not to be within the domain OF
reasonable contention.
"The inference that no attempt to
could have been Intended,
and that no monopolization resulted
from the acts complained OF since 1t
is established that a small percentage
of the crude oil produced was con-
trolled by the combination, is unwar-
ranted. AS substantial power over
the crude product was the inevitable
result of the absolute control whlch
existed over the refined product, the
monopolization Of the one carried win
il the power to control the other, ana
if the inference which TINS situation
suggests We're developed, which we
deem II unnecessary to 90, they
might well serve to add addltlonal CO.
gency 10 the presumption OF intent 10
which we have tound
arises from the unquestioned PROOF on
other subjects
The chief justice at one point IN ms
opinion took up some OF the conten-
tions of the defendants, particularly
that based on the famous knlght case
criticised last fall by President Roose-
welt. This contention was that the
Sherman antitrust low could not be
applied to the Standard on because
TO do so would be to extend the power
of congress to subjects beyond the
reach of it's authority to regulate IN
terstate commerce by enabling thal
body TO deal with mere questions OF
production of commodities Wlthn the
states.
The chief justice said that this con-
tention as the holding of the hnight
case was unsound and required no eX-
press notice beyond that given IL IN
cases already decided.
The court then considered the argu-
ments that the statute could not ne
applied under tine facts IN the case
without impairing rights OF properly
and destroying the freedom OF con-
tract of trade which is essentially ne
cessary to the well being OF society'
"But the ultimate foundation OF all
these arguments said the chlef JUS
tice. sis the assumption that reason
may not be resorted to In interrupt,