Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1911-12-05

cent. while the American Tobacco com
% pany will have 33.08 per cent the Lig
gett & Meyers 20.O5 Eser cent, the Loril
lard company 22.S2 per cent and thu
Reynolds company 2.66 per cent Th'
stock of the other thirteen companies
both preferred and common, has beer
taken from the defendant American
Tobacco company and has been dis
tributed among its stockholders. AL
covenants restricting competition have
been declared null and further per
formance Of them has been enjoined
The preferred stock of the different
companies has now been given voting
power which was denied it under the
old organization. The ratio of the pre-
ferred stock to the common was as rs
to 40. This constitutes very decided
change in the character of the owner
ship and control of each company.
In the original suit there were twen-
! ty-nine defendants, who were charged
with being the cOnspiratOrs through
whom the illegal combination acquired
and exercised its unlawful dominion.
Under the decree these defendants will
| hold amounts of stock in the various
| distributee companies ranging from Al
per cent as a maximum to 2S1a per
cent as minimum, except in the case
of one small company, the Porto Rican
Tobacco company, in which they will
hold 45 per cent The twenty-nine in
dividual defendants are enjoined for
three years from buying any stock ex
cept from each other, and the group is
thus prevented from extending its con-
troll during that period. All parties to
the suit and the new companies who
are made parties are eniOined perpet-
ually from in any way effecting any
combination between any of the COM
panies in violation of the statute by
way of resumption of the old trust
Each of the fourteen companies is en-
Joined from acquiring stock in any of
the others. All these companies are
enjoined from having common direc-
tors or officers, or common buying or
selling agents, or common Offices, or
lending money to each other.
Size of New Companies.
Objection was made by certain in
dependent tobacco companies that this
settlement was unjust because it left
companies with very large capital in
active business and that the settle
ment that would be effective to put all
on an equality would be a division of
the capital and plant of the trust into
small fractions in amount more near
ly equal to that of each of the indie |
pendent companies. This contention |
results from a misunderstanding of |
the antitrust law and its purpose. 1t |
is not intended thereby to prevent the |
accumulation Of large capital in bust
ness enterprises in which such a COM
bination can secure reduced cost of
production, sale and distribution. 1t
is directed against such an aggrega-
tion Of capital only when its purpose
is that of sitting competition, enhanc-
ing or controlling prices and establish
ing a monopoly. If we shall have by
the decree defeated these purposes
and restored competition between the
large units into which the capital and
plant have been divided we shall have
accomplished the useful purpose of
.he statute
confiscation Not the Purpose of the
Statute.
1t is not the purpose of the statute
to contscate the property and capital
of the offending trusts Methods of
by fine or Imprisonment
If the individual offenders. by fine of
he corporation or by forfeiture of its
goods in transportation are provided. ,
)ut the proceeding in equity is a spe-
'ific remedy to stop the operation of
he trust by injunction and preve2t {
he future use of the plant and capital G
n violation of the statute. I
Effectiveness of Decree.
l venture to say that not in the his {
ory Of American law has a decree |
more effective for such a purpose been
uttered by court than that against I
he tobacco trust. As Circuit Judge l
loyes said in his judgment approving 1
he decree c
"The extent to which it has been {
necessary to tear apart this combina- c
ion and force it into new forms with o
he attendant burdens ought to demon
trate that the federal antitrust statute
a drastic statute which accomplishes 6
Elective results, which so long as if 4
tauds on the statute books must be a
6eyed and which cannot be disobey g
d without incurring farreaching pen n
lties. And, on the other hand. the Q
nccessful reconstruction Of this or :
anization should teach that the effect r
enforcing this statute is not to de- ii
troy, but to reconstruct: not to de- h
lolish. but TO recreate in accordance Q
18th the conditions which the congress- o.
as declared shall exist among the n
eople Of the United States" D
Common Stock Ownership. Il
1t has been assumed that the nres. c
It pro rata and common ownership in
l these companies by former stock
llders Of the trust would insure a .,
'ntinuance OF the same old single con- =,
M Of ,rH ] -