Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-09-18
| MANY EXCUSES.
Offered by Officials Of The
Harvester Companies.
Explanations That Organization
Doesn't Restrain Trade.
Agreement Of Big Harvester Men
To Combine Presented.

Chicago, Sept. 17.--Altheugh ii
sold $100,0o0.0o0 worth of farm i'm
plements.I the International Harvester
Co. of America, last year, made onl*
$4,000 in profits according to the
company's president, who testified,
today, before a special examiner in
the governments suit 10 dissolve the
corporation under the Sherman anti
trust law.
Questions We're asked by the gov
ernment attorneys TO show that the
International Harvester Co. offAmer-
lea. was merely the selling agent of
The International Harvester Co. of
New Jersey, and fbat the latter com
pany was to make all the money.
is it not your object to buy from
the New Jersey corporation at such a
price as viii enable you TO sell SO
that You will have neither loss nor
profit? ?" asked Edwin P. Grosyenor.
special assistant attorney general.
Our object is to buy as cheaply
as we can and to make as much as
possible. We try TO buy from the
New Jersey Co. at prices we would
get from any other company" re-
piled MIR. Haskins, the president OF
the company.
But you never have paid diyi-
dend?"
No, we never have"
Most of today's session was devot-
ed to describing technical features of
farm implements One reason, Mr..
Haskins said. why the sales company
made only $4,000, was that it was
constantly expanding its business ana
expending large sums for advertis-
ing.
Analysing the business of his COM
petitors, Clarence S. Funk, general
manager OF the International Harves-
ter Co. today, in the governments
antitrust suit against that corpora
ton, testified there hardly was farm
| implement in whose manufacture apa
| sale competition did not exist.
The governments suit for the dis
solutions of the harvester company
asserts the corporation monopolizes
the harvesting machinery business of
the country and fixes prices to the
serious injury of the farmer
Mr. Funk declared there were from
three to 70 firms manufacturing farm
implements.
1--WE have from 40 to so COMPETE
| tors selling corn shelters" he said,
| "25 producing motor vehicles, 70
producing cultivators, Is corn husk-
ers and three reapers. The field is
pretty we'll covered by competitors
Grasshoppers and crickets cost the
Harvester Co more than S4,o0O000, MI
Funk declared. In answer to the gov
ernments charges that the company
| monopolized the binding Irvine bust
ness, thus compelling the farmer to
pay high prices. he declared the com
pany had attempted to produce "a su-
pericr binder Irvine out of flax.
"There was so much sweetness left
| in the Irvine that the grasshoppers and
| cricketts, feeding on it. became a
pest" said Mr. Funk. I'VE conducted
experiments and expended s4,0o0000 IN
| trying to furnish the farmer With n
suitable twire.''
] Government attorneys presented, to-
| day. in the governments antitrust
| suit against the International Harves-
| ter Co. what purported to be an orig
| inal agreement by which George W.
Perkins, Cyrus II. Mccormick and
| Charles Deering formed a voting
trust which placed them in absolute
control of the $4,000. 600 corporation.
The agreement, dated Aug. Y, 1902.
as for 10 years. 1t expired only few
weeks ago. It was introduced in testi-
mony 10 show that these three men
had turned over to them all the stock;
they had the sole voting power of the
corporation
Another exhibit purported to show
that Mr.. Perkins was chairman of the
corporations finance committee and
that of the six members of that COM
mittee. four were directors in the Stee
Corporation and members of the Steel