Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1912-05-02
HARVESTER SUIT
IS BEGUN BY j. S.
Appointment Of Receivers Il
Wind Up Business of Alleged
Monopoly Is Suggested.

vester company In the federal district
court here. In a petition in equity this
fl+0.0oO,00o corporation, popularity called
the Harvester trust. is declared to exist
In violation of tho Sherman law and its
dissolution Is sought.
To accomplish the disintegra ton Of tho
so-called trust. the government asks the
court to issue injunctions to bar from
Interstate commerce the products of the
International Harvester company or the
International Harvester company Of
America, its selling agency. The appoint
ment OF receivers to take charge of the
property and wind mp the business IF
the court should be Of the opinion that
the public interests will be better served
thereby" Is suggested.
The filing OF the suit comes as the
climax of Ave years OF investigation by
the government. Lately the case has
figured prominently in political discussion
between President Taft and Colonel
Roosevelt regarding certain instructions
which Mr.. Roosevelt while president in
1907 gave to his attorney-general. Charles
j. Bonaparte. concerning the prosecution
of the concern. That feature Of the case
was recently before tho Senate.
In brief the government charges the
Harvester company with being a COM
bination in restraint of trade. monop-
olizinE or attempting to monopolize
the manufacture and sale Of harvest
ing machinery. 1t is alleged that
the company has advanced the prices
of these articles ito the grave injury
OF the farmer and the general public"
and is extending Its business into all
lines of agricultural Implements with
the purpose of monopolistic control.
PROPORTION OF BUSINESS.
The government alleges that the
international Harvester company con-
trols at least 30 per cent. of the ira ,
IN the United States in harvesters or
grain binders. IS per cent. of the NOW.
ers and more than so per cent of the
binder Irvine. There are Only three
or four manufacturers of harvesting
machinery in the United States other
than the International Harv ester COM
pany, the petition says These 1t is
added, are comparatively small and
as their business does not embrace
the entire United States. in many Sec
tions of the country the International
Harvester company has complete
monopoly of harvesting machiner
Considering agricultural implements
of every kind, othef than harvesting
lines the petition declares. that the
output of the alleged trust amounts
to over 80 pet cent. Of the whole.
The government contends that the cor
poration has eliminated competition by
securing control of great majority Of
the retail implement dealers in the
United States who are made their ex-
elusive selling sales agents. The petit
lions says:
THE opportunities for any new COM
petitOrs are constantly being closed by
the defendants in all lines of agricul-
tural implements: the agencies for dis
tribution. the retail implement dealers.
and others are rapidly coming under
their undisputed control. and unless pre-
vented and restrained, their complete I'M
challenged dominion of every branch Of
trade and commerce In agricultural i'm
plements Of all kinds may be confidently
expected at an early date"
HAS CONCEALED OWNERSHIP.
The government charges that the de-
PENDANTS have absorbed competing COM
panies. but concealed their ownership
permitting them to be advertised "as
ton with them, the trust or any COM
hination.' intending thereby to mislead.
deceive and defraud the public and more
effectualy cripple existing competitors
and keep out new ones
The bill contains these charges
defendants have resorted to unfair
trade methods; have made inaccurate and
misleading statements concerning rival
III. ~
petitors: have by Misrepresentation
sought to induce competitors, agents and
dealers TO abandon them, and In divers un-
fair ways have endeavored to destroy
them. and for the purpose OF destructive
competition have reduced prices of their
machines In some localities below cost Of
production and distribution while keeping
prices up in other localities
Defendants have systematically bought
up patents upon harvesting machinery
tools. and implements, and acquired all
new inventions therein. in order thereby
more effectually to perpetuate the com
bination and monopoly"
The following corporations and in
dividuals are mentioned as defendants in
the petition:
LIST OF THE DEFENDANTS.
International Harvester company Inter-
national Harvester company Of America,
Interna tional Flax Irvine company, Wis
consin Steel company, the Wisconsin Lum-
Der company. Illinois Northern railway
the Chicago West Pullman & Southern
Railroad company. Cyrus II. Mccormick
Charles Deering, James Deering, John j.
Glessner. VIM. II. Jones, Harold T.. Nc
Cormick. Richard +. Howe. Edgar A.
Bancroft, George F. Baker. VIM J.
1.ouderback. Norman r. Ream, Charles
Steele. John A. Chapman. Ebert II. Gary,
r. Wilson, William l.. Saunders, George
w. Perkins,
The prosecution of the case Will be
directed by Edwin p. GrOsvenor, spe-
cial assistant to the attorney general
who has charge Of the "bathtub trust"
cases.
The International Harvester COM
pany was organized in New Jersey
in 1902. Prior TO that time the COM
Establishments for the manufacture AMI
sale of harvesting implements In ac-
tive competition. The alleged rust
was formed through the combination
Of the Mccormick Harvesting Machine
company of Illinois. the Deering COM
many of Illinois, the Plano Manufac-
turing company of Illinois, Warder,
bushnell e. Glessner company of Ohio
and the Milwaukee Harvester COM
pany. The aggregate annual output
of these FIVE concerns 1t Is said.