Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-05-15
STANDARD OIL
Loses OUT
Supreme Court Rules Corpo-
ration Is in Restraint
of Trade
AN EpOCHMAK|NC DECISION
The Opinion Is Very Voluminous
Ard is by Chief Justice
White.

! Washington, Ds G., May 1.-THE
supreme court today affirmed the
Standard Oil decree giving the gov
ernment the victory. The decision
was read by Chief Justice White and
was very yoluminous. BY the re-or
ganization of the Standard Oil Com
pany of New Jersey, the chief justice
said there is prima facie evidence that
there is an endeavor to control and
monopoliZe and that further investi-
CATION made this conclusive pre-
sumption of an intent to restrain trade.
He said that only the question of Il
remedy remained for consideration.
! Opinion by White.
Washington, D. c., May 15.-At 4
O'clock Chief Justice White began to
deliver the opinion OF the supreme
court in the suit, over the dissolutiol
of the Standard Oil organization.
1t was Chief Justice White who
had lent his voice to the refusal o;
the court to dissolve the so-called
sugar trust when the famous knight
case was before the court E,e also
delivered a dissenting opinion when
the Northern Securities company
was dissolved by the court as being
in violation of the Sherman antitrust
law
On the knight case, the STANDARD
Oil depended largely for support; e..
the majority opinion in the Northerh
Securities case the government had
founded much of its hope. 1t was evl-
dent that Attorney General Wicker
sham, who had directed the govern
ments battle during its later stages,
was not delighted when the chief
justice began, but he maintained
some hope of success.
Chief Justice White first went in
to an extensive recital of the facts
in the case and then held that the
court had jurisdiction over the suit.
+ which had been questioned Iy the
: Standard Oil.
q Chief Justice White said from the
n bench that theetaoinmfwypaoiffi
e'ht as thC SLuc vi lAC cdI ILL., ne
ispoke of a ''bungle' of testimony and
of law.
The only point in which the tw.
sides We're in accord was taat the
first and second sections of he s;her-
man antitrust law controlled tie
case. The chief justice said .ae court
seized on this point as basis on
which to work out a decision
Taking up the two sections the chief
} Justice began consideration of the
law. promising to come later to is
application of the present case. He
first took up the common law which
dealt with the problems raised by the
, Sherman antitrust law.
Story Of the Case.
| tBy Special Leased Wire to New Mexican)
Washington, d. c., May 15.-The suit
, which called forth today's decision
was instituted in 1906 in the United
States Circuit Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri 1t was brought
in the name of the United States. The
| immediate object was to dissolve the
Standard Oil Company of New Jer-
sey.
. From the very beginning, the busi-
a mes and the legal world recognized
p that the suit put the Sherman Anti.
:. Trust law to the most severe test to
!. which it had been subjected. The
4 law has been on the statute books
l
{ since 1890 and had been the basis of
9 some eighteen suits finally passed up
q On by the supreme court of the Uni
@ ted States. That the law was consti-
!. tutonal was accepted as settled by
$ these decisions, but simple as the
$ words OF the statute seemed, there
n was an absence of unanimity in re-
!. gard to it's Interpretation. With that
Il situation confronting the government
1. and the defendants, the suit was be-
Il gun with the general belief that the
q entire business world would feel the
4. effect of the outcome of the gigantic
e struggle
e The government claimed that two
e sections of the Sherman Anti Trust
y law had been violated. The first
is section reads as follows:
e. Every contract, combination in the
k form of trust or otherwise, or con.
r. spiracy in restraint OF trade or COM
II merce among the several states. or
n foreign nations, is hereby declared il
a. legal
IN The second section reads
IL Every person (which subsequent
y, ly was explained in the statute to in
re clude corporations) who shall mono
oil polize. or attempt to monopolize or
or conspire with any other person or per-
le sons, to monopolize, any part of trade
X or commerce among the several
I'll states, or with foreign nations, shall
It be deemed guilty of misdemeanor. =
On The Standard Oil Company of New
er Jersey, some seventy subsidiary cor
be operations, John D. Rockefeller, vii
co liam Rockefeller, Henry NJ. Flagler
of Henry H. Rogers, John D. Archbold
In Oliver H. Payne, and Charles NJ Pratt
ed all defendants in the suit, denied the
pf charges.
to Months were spent in gathering evt
be idence. The general line Of attack al
nd shown by evidence presented by tn
fContinued on Page -Four,