The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1911-05-16
Z,,1 sI1I,4| 2{ys!l5Iyl,

Quality Never Varies
:..=-: ---.-.. .:.-.-:.
including these agreements not for the
purpose of weighing the substantial merit
of the numerous charges of wrongdoing
made during such period but solely az an
ana Tor discovering intent and purpose.
We think no disnterested mind can sur
vey the period in question without being
irresstibiy driven to the conclusion that
the very genius for commercial develop
inent and organization which il would
seem was manifested from the beginning
soon begot an intent and purpose to ex-
clude others. which was frequently mani
Tested by acts and dealings wholly in
consistent with the theory that they were
made with the single conception of ad-
vancing the development of business
power by method. but which. on the
contrary. necessarily involved the intent
TO drive others from the field and 10 ex-
clude them from their right to trade and
thus accomplish the mastery which was
the end in view
And considering the period from the
d ate of the trust agreements of 1870 aud
lsS2 up to the time of the expansion Of
the New Jersey corporation. the gradual
extension OF the power over the coinmerce
in oil which ensued, the decision of the
Supreme Court of Ohio. the tarcliness or
reluctance in conforming to the commands
OF that decision. the method first adopted
and that which eliminated in the plan
OF the New Jersey corporation. all ad-
ditionally serve to make manifest the
continued existence Of the intent which
we have previously indicated and which
among other things impelled the expan-
sion of tho New Jersey corporation The
exercise OF the power which resulted from
that organization fortities the foregoing
conclusion, since the development which
ensued OF every efficient means by which
competition could have been asserted.
the slow hut resistles- methods whcn
followed by which means of tranSporta-
tion were absorbed and brought under
control. the system of marketing which
was adopted by which the country was
divided into districts and the trade in
each district in oil was turned over to
designated corporation within the COM
bination and all others were excluded. all
lead the mind upto conviction of IA pur
pose and intent which we think is so
certain as practically to ca,ise the subjec,
not TO too within the domain of reasonable
contention.
The inference that no attempt to
monopolizs could haye been intended and
that no monopolization resulted from the
acts complained OF. since il is established
that very small percentage of the crude
oil produced was contro oiled by the COM
power over the crude product was the
Inevitable result OF the absolute control
which existed over the refined product
the monopolization of the one carried with
II the power to control the other. and il
the inferences which this situation sug-
gests were developed. which We deem it
unnecessary to do. they might well serve
to add additional cogency to the pre-
sumption OF intent to monopolize which
We have found arises from the unQues-
toned proof on other subjects.
THE REMEDY TO BE ADMINISTERED.
We are thus brought TO the last subject
which we are called upon to consider.
viz: Fourth, the remedy to be admin
istered.
1T may be considered that ordinarily
where IL II found that acts had been done
in violation OF the statute adequate meas
ures OF relief would result from rest raining
the doing OF such acts in the future.
Swift vs. Cnitsd States. iss L. $. s7SD
But in a case like this. where the con-
dition which has been brought about in
violation OF the statute in and Of itself
10 not only continued attempt to mo-
nopolize but also a monopoization the
duty to enforce the statute requires the
application Of broader and more con-
trolling remedies. As penalties which
are not authorized by law may not be
inflicted by judicial authority il follows
that to meet the situation with which We
are confronted the application Of reme-
dies twofold in character becomes essen
tial: First. To forbid the doing in the
future Of acts like those which we have
found TO have been done in the past which
would be violative Of the statute; second
the exertion Of such measure of relief
a. will effectually dissolve the combina-
ton found to exist in violation Of the
statute and thus neutralize the extensive
and continually operating force which
"A al A. n q f,t llN,
obtained has brought and will continue
to bring about
In applying remedies for this purpose.
however the fact must not he overlook ed
that injury to the public by the prevention
Of an undue restraint on or the monopol-
zation OF trade or commerce is the founda-
tion on which the prohibitions of the
statute rest. and. moreover. that one OF
the fundamental purposes of the statute
is to protect. not to destroy, rights OF
property.
"fet us. then. as a means Of accurately
determining what relief we are to AFFORD.
first come to consider what relief was
afforded by the court below in order to
fix how far il is necessary to take from or
add to that relief. TO the end that the pro-
hibitions Of the statute may have COM
plete and operative force.
DECISION OF THE COURT BELOW
"The court below by virtue Of sections
!, : 6Hu VI It's uotTct, WHICH We nave Ill
part previously excerpted in the margin,
adjudged that the New Jersey corporation
in 40 far as It held the stock of the various
corporations recited in sections and
Of the decree, or controlled the same. was
"a combination in violation Of the first
section Of the act and an attempt To mo-
nopoliZe. or a monopoliZation contrary
to the second section of the act IL COM
manded the dissolution of tho combina-
ton and therefore in effect directed tho
transfer by tho New Jersey CORPORATION
back to the stockholders Of the various
subsidiary corporations entitled 10 the
same of the stock which had been turned
over to tho New Jersey company in ex-
change for its stock
r>"To make this command eSective SOC
ton of the decree forbade tho New
Jersey corporation from in any form or
manner exercising any ownership or
exerting any power directly or indirectly
in virtue Of it's apparent title o tho stocks
of the subsidiary corporations and pro-
hibited those subsidiary corporations
from paying any dividends to the New
Jersey corporations or doing any act
which would recognize further power
in that company. except to the extent
that il was necessary to enable that com