Norwich bulletin., 1912-05-01
Dissolution of
 Harvester Trust
GOVERNMENT FILES A PETITION
 IN EQUITY.
CLAIMS IT IS MONOPOLY
Asks That Receivers Be Appointed to Wind Up Affairs of company-Un- fair Methods Alleged.

St. Paul, April S0.-By filing a peti- ticn in equity in the federal district court here today, the government in stituted a suit against the Interna- tional Harvester company under the provisions of the Sherman antitrust law
 The government asks;
 That the $140,000,000 corporation be dissolved on the ground that it is a monopoly in restraint of trade.
 Asks for Receivership.
 That injunctions be issued to bar from interstate commerce the products of the International Harvester com pany or of the International Harvester company of America, it's selling agency.
 That receivers be appointed to take charge of the property and wind up the business of the defendant, if the court finds such action compatible with public interest.
 Must Enter Appearance by June 3.
 Assistant District Attorney J. Mark Dickey, who filed the petition before Judge Charles A. Willard, announced that the subpoenas issued by Cyrus H. Mccormick, president of the Harvester company, and all of the rest of the IS individuals and seven corporations Who are named in the petition are return able May 6.
 The defendants must enter their ap- pearauce in court by June 3, but il probably will be July 1 before they will be required to answer the govern files it's replication, probably in Au- gust, the case in all likelihood will be at issue.
 Case to Be Tried in U. 5. Court.
 District Attorney Charles s. HouPt who ordinarily would have taken charge of the filing of the govern mnt's suit, has been in Washington in consultation with Attorney General Wickarsham. who was directing the case from that end. Mir. Dickey re ceived word that Attorney General Wickersham would probably file a ceT- tificate of expedition in order that as little time as possible will Ee lost in bringing the suit 10 trial. The case by this means will be removed from the district court of Minnesota to the United States circuit court of appeals for the Eighth district, thus hastening the issue to the supreme court of the United States.
 Monopoistic Control Charged.
 The chief charges by the government against the Harvester company are:
 That the company, in monopolizing the manufacture and sale of harvest ing machinery, has advanced prices ''to the grave injury of the farmer and the general public"
 That the company controls at least go per cent. of the trade in the United States in harvesters or grain binders 75 per cent. of the mowers and more than 50 per cent. of the binder twine; that there are only three or four man. ufacturers other than the International in the United States and that as these have only a small part of the business and in some sections of the country none at all, the International has g monopolistic control.
 Absorbed Competing Companies.
 That the company has absorbed competing companies while allowing the companies still to advertise as be- ing independent, thereby misleading deceiving and defrauding the public and more efectuaIly crippling existine competitors and keeping out new ones.'
 That the defendants have resorter to urfair trade methods by attempting to induce agents to handle only theil pfOducLS. Inat they have bought u patents to perpetuate the monopoly That wten combination was effected of the Mccormick Harvesting Machin- cry company of Illinois, the Deerinz company of Illinois, the Plano Manu- featuring company of Illinois, Wardel Bushnell & Glessner company of OhiC and the Milwaukee Harvester compa ny, the aggregate output amounted tC more than S5 per cent. of all the har- vesting machinery and 30 per cent. oI all the binder twine produced and solC in the United States al that time.
 Ironclad Contracts With Retailers.
 That in organizing the Internationa Harvester company the defendants were actuated by a determination tC form a monopoly.
 That the company bound retai dealers by contract not to sell the products of any other manufacturer.
 That the Harvester company re. ceives iron, steel and lumber from n, Wisconsin Steel company and the Wis. cCnsin Lumt CT company. subsidiaries which are used to eliminate competi- ton.
 That the company has used railroad. which 1t controls to obtain unGu, preference from railroads connertins with them.