The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1911-05-20
STANDARD OIL HELD
To Be ILLEGAL TRUST
Company Doomed by Decision
of Supreme Court.
Corporation and Its Subsidiaries VIII
Not Be Excluded from Interstate
Commerce Pending Prepa.
rstions for Dlssolvlng.

OOuit VI Nhc 1ulNru OuhtcS. y AheDt
probation of the Sherman antitrust
law. long awaited by an anxious bust.
ness world, is also handed down In
connection with the decree.
To accomplish this gigantic dissolu.
ton the our sets n period OF six
months. This h an extension OF five
months over the time allotted in the
dissolution decree OF the lower court
The decree OF the circuit court was
modified by the supreme court In only
one other particular. The Supreme
court orders that the Standard Oil
company and its subsidiaries shall not
be excluded from interstate commerce
pending the putting OF It's house in or
der.
The decision may be summarized In
brief as follows:
/. The Standard OIL company Is Il.
legal in its organization. both az a
combination in restraint OF trade and
as a monopoly, and its dissolution is
ordered.
2. Contracts, combinations, etc,
which ~unreasonobly or unduly restrain
AAAAtA nAaA1 NAhhN aAh commence VI
which are unreasonably restrictive Of
competitive conditions, are Illegal.
3. Contracts, combinations, etc.
which reasonably restrain interstate
trade and do not come with
In the prohibition OF law.
4. To determine whether a combina.
ton is guilty Of violation OF the anti
trust law, It's intent TO exclude others
from the same field OF industry must
be established.
8. Contracts. combinations, etc, in
restraint OF trade, with the one excep-
ton OF advancing the development OF
business power by unusual methods,
do rot constitute violation Of the an.
thrust act.
G. In holding the Standard Oil com.
pany illegal the court does not assume
TO condemn sw%eepingly similar com.
binations. but intends 20 pass upon
each case upon its merits as presented.
The decision OF the court fails TO
point out any way in which the Stand.
ard OH company may dissolve and re-
organize.
I'VE construe the Decree said the
court. mot as %depriying the stock
holders or tho corporations after the
dissolution OF this combination Of the
power 10 make normal and lawful con.
tracts or agreements, but as restrain
ing them from. by any device what.
ever creating directly or indirectly the
Illegal combination which the decree
dissolved"
The decision OF the court In regard
TO the general Interpretation of the
Sherman antitrust law was awaited
with greater anxiety by the business
world than the finding OF fact In the
Standard Oil case. The court holds
that II is necessary to distinguish be.
tween Reasonable and "Unreason-
able restraint OF trade as covered by
the Sherman antitrust law,
The effect OF the oecision as viewed
by distinguished lawyers, is to insert
the word unreasonable" into the gen
eral prohibition In the antitrust law
against combinations In restraint OF
trade. The supreme cour has thus
eliminated the uncertainty with which
all business combinations regarded
the Sherman antitrust law, and in the
future IL will be up TO the COVER A ent
TO draw the line between good aru bud
trusts. The antitrust law as construed
by the court, does not apply 20 all
combinations, contracts or acts I'm re.
strain OF trade. but only to those which
are shown 20 be unreasonable and In
which the intent 20 form an unlawful
conspiracy or monopoly "a be proved
or inferred.
The decision and its effect was re
garded In Washington as distinctly re
assuring 20 business.
The decision OF the court was read
by Chief Justice Edward Douglas
White. II was unanimous. with the ex
ception OF Associate Justice Harlan's
dissent. Justice Harlan's words wer<
, marked by biting sarcasm. lie con
tended hat the court had not gon,
far enough and he objected 10 tn,
words OF the chief justice in constru
ing the scope and purpose OF the anti
trust act. He declared that the cour
had rendered an opinion that reverse
an unbroken line Of decisions foI
fifteen years past. He criticised tn,
\ corporation lawyers who. failing {,
= get an amendment TO laws through
congress. came TO the United Statel
l. courts for relief. lie added will
manifest sarcasm that II was becom
Ing fashionable to amend the constI
= tuition and the federal statutes b,
a judicial constructions.
II was the Interpretation OF IN.
Sherman law SO as TO apply only q
unreasonable combinations TO whlcI
Associate Justice Harlan objected 81
vigorously.
The opinion covered thirty pages Q
printed matter, but the chief justice q
delivering II followed his usual rul
and stated the courts conclusion
" orally.
Twice In the course Of his opinio
The chief justice strongly limited tina
Pr n the Sherman law was o constTue
a A.. .Hr Vuht ~ raauop huf fpataaH tVa