New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-11-01

cigars year. are the oppressed and starv-
ing competitors whom YOU have been urged
TO protect
What do they want In this cause? They
want the American Tobacco Company
thrown into the hands of receiver in or
der that they may pick up some Of the
good things OF this company at the auction
block.
After Adrian II. Larkin. on behalf OF
the preferred stockholders committee.
and L. G.. krauthoff. on behalf OF the
minority stockholders had spoken In
favor Of the plan. Judge Lacombe an
nounced Attorney General Wickersham's
argument in the case. and a breathless
silence descended upon the courtroom as
Mr.. Wickersham arose and began his ad-
dress TO the court, in which he said in
part:
] must confess to great deal Of sym
pathy with the position of the independents
who have appeared at the bar of this
court. and TO some amusement at the In
dignant protest of the representative OF
the American Tobacco Company concern
ing what he deemed the eXtravagant claims
Of the INDEPENDENTS in this situation
! can readily imagine that men who have
for years been fighting this great COM
binatlon. now standing condemned at the
bar OF this court. mey well come here In
vitng yocr honors to apply the lex taionis,
and send II forth crippled and ruined and
detected, and invest them with the power
To grow great the great combination
has been in the past
Decision Leaves No Doubt.
But this Is not the function of the gov
eminent nor Is II the function OF this
court, to pay heed TO such demands, how
ever equitable they may seem outside OF
legal proceedings. Nor are we left in
doubt by the decision Of the Supreme Court
of the United States as To the considera-
lions which must govern both the govern
ment in its attitude toward the conditions
that have been made here. ana the tune-
ton of the court IN passing upon that sub
Ject and must turn in measure =
deaf ear to considerations which might ap-
peal 10 our Humanitarian sense. but which
may not move Dur legal judgment
Mr.. Wickersham then spoke about the
power and the function Of the court IN
this matter. The Standard Oil case was
simple problem. he said. that being a
corporatio which held the stock or
some thirty eight other corporations
The Supreme Court decided that the
stocks should he distributed pro rata 10
the stockholders Of the New Jersey cor
dividuals. i'm the same right for the time
at least. would control each and every
one Of the corporations
When il came 10 deal with this case.
Mr. Wickersham continued, the court
had before II a history of amalgamation
not simply by stock ownership but by
every known device. and so 1t RENTED
the case back TO this court for the pur-
rose 81 working out some scheme OF
disintegration which would restore legal
conditions He continued:
And for this purpose. not so much be
cause of the interest Of the unfortunate
competitors. but because of the public in
terest because of the great calamity TO
the business interests Of the country which
the court foresaw would certainly follow
If -. great intricate network of industry,
which had been built up through twenty
years of effort, were paralyzed. the court
i'm RENTING it. pointed out the consider
ations which should govern this court In
its action under the decree.