The Washington herald., 1911-01-12

somewhat yesterday by the closing argu-
ment of the Attorney General in the
hearing of the tobacco trust case.
For example. in reply to question
from Justice Holmes whether mere power
or size of a combination constituted a
monopoly in restraint of trade, the At
torney General replied that he did not con-
tend that it did. He stated that any one
Of the many instances of the acquisition
of property by the American Tobacco
Company, considered alone, might pass
as an incident of business development.
but when all Of the separate acts of the
American Tobacco Company, taken to-
gether, in connection with the enormous
growth of its business and the control it
exercised, it constituted an attempt to
monopolize trade. within the meaning Of
the Sherman act.
The governments counsel were able to
extract considerable comfort out of the
hearing yesterday, due to the questioning
by the Supreme Court justices directed
at William B. Hornblower attorney for
the Imperial Tobacco Company. the Brit
ish concern. Indeed, the questions pro-
pounded by Justice IsArton suggested that
that jurist might conclude that the court
below erred in dismissng so much of the
bill as charged the British companies with
q oty ~ ltSlISlc Will
commerce under the Sherman act.
Trust Lawyers Perturbed.
The discontinue of the government
counsel on the first days argument, due
to the questioning from members of the
court, was shared yesterday by the at
torneys who appeared for the trust. al
though Chief Justice White brought
blush to the check of the Attorney Gen.
eral by suggesting that possibly. follow
ing out the line of reasoning being ad,
vanced by Mr.. Wickersham in his argu-
ment, the American Tobacco Company
may after all have brought about "a
benign result
The Attorney General had just stated
that the American Tobacco Company.
through its influence upon the price Of
leaf tobacco, had so offended the tobacco
growers that they in turn had formed
combinations. such as the Society of
Equity. and were holding out against the
trust by storing their tobacco leaf. From
this condition OF affairs, the Attorney
General drew the conclusion that the
whole social situation in the country was
upset. that one element of society was at
war with another. and that this condi-
ton, the outgrowth of the formation of
the American Tobacco Company, pre-
sented an additional argument in favor
of dissolving the tobacco trust.
Then it was that the Chief Justice
leaned forward and propounded this
question to the Attorney General:
IF one combination produces another
combination. and the operation of both
has a tendency to raise the price which
the producer receives for his tobacco
leaf. is it not, after all, benign re-
sult?"
1T may be benign to the combinations
and to the tobacco grower, but what of
the effect on the ultimate consumer in
quired the Attorney General.
And then. without waiting for a reply
from the bench. he quickly added:
But We are getting into the domain of
political economy, and 1 think We would
better stick to the law
Chief Justice Laughs.
The Chief Justice had a delightful
laugh over the temporary discontinue
he had worked to the Attorney General,
and did not pursue the inquisition.
At another time he submitted two ques--
tions to Attorney General Wiickersham
in a more serious vein, that caused all
of the attorneys to wake up and take
notice. The Attorney General had
stated that the American Tobacco Com
pany had been formed originally by five
separate and independent manufacturing
to stop "a ruinous competi-
ton" Upon this statement the Chief
Justice inquired:
ute compels the continuation of ruinous
Ii may have been because the Chief
Justice propounded two questions at the
same time, that the first, which has just
been stated. remained unanswered. The
Chief Justice told the Attorney General
that he could answer the questions at
any time before he concluded his argu-
nent, and he has forty minutes remain
ing to be consumed to-day. Mr.. Wick
ersham may decide to answer the Ques-
ton in that time.
When the second question was asked.
the Attorney General promptly replied
that he was ready to answer 1t at once.
and did give an answer. The question
grew out of a statement in the early part
of Mr.. Wickersham's argument, that the
tobacco business was such that man or
4 corporation dealing in one kind of to-
bacco product will necessarily find HIM
self, sooner or later. involved in another
branch of the business. He made this |
statement in the course OF his descrip- |
ton of the acquisitions from time to time |
Of the American Tobacco Company, which |
in its inception dealt mainly with the
OF cigarettes, but had later |
the plug tobacco business and |
other branches.
The Chief Justice asked Mr.. Wicker |
sham whether it was not true. in view Of
his statement that one engaged in the |
business in one line was neces- |
sarily led into other branches of the |
business. could not be offered by the de- |
fendants as justification of the exten- |
sion Of their business beyond its original |
conception.
I'VE do not object to their getting into
the other lines of the tobacco business"
replied the Attorney General very prompt |
~. ''but We do not think that the neces- |
stiles of the business which / have con-
ceded can be put forward to justify q |
OF the tobacco business
Much interest In Case.
The same intense public and profess
sional interest was manifested In the ar
suments yesterday. The part OF the court |
room reserved for members of the bar |
was crowded to its capacity. and all Of
Ehe space available to the public was
aiken. and long line Of persons formed |
outside before the, court met ana being |
augmented BY new arrivals. - those ~ |
he head Of the line gained entrance 70 |
he court room. Il coQfinued - Z fcrcihle l
of pohllc intereet in the |
|s11es e4A etsqQQlspalf The afsesaoqn.
s = ee ~