The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1912-05-11

err. which, as have mentioned was
entirely in the hands of the holders
upon the holders of the preferred
stocks, so that in each of the els.
tribute companies (among which the
greater part OF the tobacco business
proper was distributed) instead of the
control being in the hands of a ma.
jority Of 40 II was put in the hands
OF majority of 1888, and by that
method the control was taken entire
Iy out OF the hands OF the individual
defendants who had controlled the
combination in the past, and tI,y
we're enjoined from increasing their
holdings. All restrictive covenants,
foreign and domestic, we're terminal
ed. All agreements between the res.
pective companies were ended. The
IA companies among which the bust
ness was distributed were specifical
ly enjoined from conveying property
from one to the other, from acquir-
ing stock in one another, from lend
ing financial assistance to each
other. They were enjoined from
making agreements with each other
as to price, terms of purchase or
sale Of leaf tobacco Or other products
dealt in by them, or apportioning
business among themselves with res.
! pect to localities. Every company
was enjoined from employing the
same business organization as that
Of any other company, from having
/ the same purchasing or selling agents
and from occupying the same offices.
They were enjoined from having com.
mon directors or common officers.
Every Distribute company was en-
Joined from doing business except In
its own name or that Of subsidiary
company, and where business was
done in the name Of a subsidiary 4,
was required that the product must
bear the name of the controlling com
pany. They we're enjoined from sell
ing any brand of product upon condi
ton that the purchaser should alsS
buy of the vendor some other brand
manufactured or sold by it.
This decree marked distinct ad
vance over that in the Standard OF
case or, for the matter of that, any
previous case. II Is safe to say M
such drastic and comprehensive de
cree has ever been rendered by
court of justice in this or any othe
country, and, save on the assumption
that business men Of intelligence ar
ready to violate the solemn mandat
Of the courts Of the United States, n,
intelligent person who has examines
and understands the subject ca
effectuate a complete and absolut
disintegration of the unlawful combil
alton found to exist and to make
impossible to continue or renew tn
practices which in the past hav
brought about the monopoly this d,
cree has destroyed.
The first superficial criticism {
the decree which was made was this
a distribution of stocks of a numbe
of companies pro rata among tn
stockholders of one of them wa
merely perpetuating the same contr'
in different form. The argument,
sound, would be properly addresse
to the legislative branch Of the Go
eminent as a basis for new legisl
ton; for the perfect legality of tn
condition resulting from such distr
tied by the Supreme Court. But, &c
nomically considered, the criticism
equally unsound. The common expe
fence of mankind is that individu,
owners of stocks in different corpor
tons who are free to sell do not co
tinue to hold the same interests il
definitely; and the whole effort
secure control of competing compa
les through stock owning has bee
based upon the theory that If Il
stockholders were left TO themselvt
they could not be relied upon to pc
petuate a common control. In II
very short time that has elapsed sin,
the entry of the decree in the T
: bacco case the process of pullir
apart has been progressively rapi
One of the principal sources of irl
tation against this combination gre
out of its distributing company-tt
United Cigar Stores company-a col
many which the pOurta rafusad IN I'M