Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1912-05-02

H. Mccormick. Charles , Deering and
George w. Perkins.
In explaining the disposition Of the
stock. the petition says that S3.461. 500 was
issued 70 J. p. Morgan & Co. for under
writing services and legal expenses.
The absorbed Milwaukee Harvester
company was converted into the 1nterna-
tional Harvester company Of America
through which the alleged trust sells ex-
clusively its entire output in the United
States.
The International, Harvester company
of America is merely the selling depart.
ment of the other international COM
pany." continues the petition. Since its
acquisition by the International Har-
vester company 1t has paid no dividends
upon its capital stock, 100000. 1t buys
and sells at the prices fixed by the paren,
company. In fact, the Wisconsin COM
pany is a bookkeeping arrangement. given
the form Of corporate entity. with a
small capitalization. for the purpose OF
enabling the larger company to do busi-
ness in States from which II Is debarred
by reason of Its huge capitalization"
ne 1tttloU tShS tHdt WIS COMPANY Oo
decreed all unlawful organization in re-
straint OF trade.
CONTROL OF RETAILERS
Pointing out that as a rule agricultural
implements are sold direct by the manu-
facturer to the retail dealer. eliminating
the usual wholesaler or jobber, the petit
ton accuses the Harvester company of
endeavoring to acquire control Of these
retail merchants scattered over the coun-
try in every city. town. village and
hamlet The means of accomplishing this
in 1903. 1901 and 1905. 1t Is declared, was
through contracts making these dealers
exclusive sales agents of the defendants
and binding them under penalties not to
sell machines not manufactured by the
International Harvester company.
During the succeeding years. ii is
charged. the company exercised like con-
troll by means Of agency contracts which
may be annulled by the International
Harvester company of America when II
considers its interests jeopardized. The
defendants, ii Is declared. are using this
termination clause to force retail dealers
20 handle only the product of the Inter
national Harvester company
The petition alleges that the Interna-
tional Harvester company in 1903 acquired
control Of D. NJ. Osborne G Co., its prin.
cipal competitor. but for two years con-
cealed its association with that company.
This" 1t is added. was in pursu
ance Of policy. by Disgusting owner.
ship. TO use controlled companies to
break down competition and secure
for themselves the baneft of public
| cav,tt y,,a IL.
Other companies. whose acquisition
II Is alleged, was concealed for a tim >
included the Aultman Miller company
of Akron. Minnie Harvester company
of Minnesota and the Keystone com
pany of Illinois.
SOURCE OF RAW MATERIAL.
The Harvester company receives its
raw materials. iron. steel and lumber
through the Wisconsin Steel company
ana the Wisconsin Lumber company
subsidiaries which the petition de-
clares are used as means and in
strumentalities to eliminate competi-
ton"
IL is alleged that the defendants
have used the Illinois Northern rail-
way and the Chicago. West Pullman
& Southern railroad companies, which
they control. to obtain undue prefer.
ences from railroads connecting with
them. This has been done, 1t is sail,
by persuad!ng connecting railroads to
allow these subsi iiary switching roads
excessive divisions of through rates
on traffic.
To illustrate the expansion of the Har-
oil lima ~r
tural implements. the petition says that
In the beginning the company manufac.
tured only harvesters or binders. NOV =
ers, reapers. rakes. Irvine. corn huskers,
shredders and shockers; to-day 1t has
spread to include tillage and seeding i'm
PIGMENTS. threshing ma chinery, wagons,
manure spreaders. gasoline engines,
cream separators. auto buggies, automo-
biles. tractors. cultivators, drills, seeders,
hay leaders. hay presses. etc.
STATEMENT BY MCCORMICK.
Chicago. April 30-In regard to the
suit filed to-day at ST. Paul by the gov
eminent against the International Har.
vester company. Cyrus H. Mccormick,
president of the Harvester company.
said:
The International Harvester company
case differs radically In its facts from all
the so-called trust cases heretofore de.
cided under the Sherman law. The Inter.
national Harvester company was or
ganzed in 1902 for the purpose of securing
economy in the manufacture and sale OF
harvesting machinery and of increaslne
the foreign trade. 1t had no water in its
nit liZafiOp hnc
reasonable return from its capital, less
than seven per cent. per annum on the
average.
The prices Of Its machines are now
substantially the same as in 1902 not
wfthstanding an Increase OF Is per
cent In raw material prices and 80
per cent. in wages The company has
caused a large saving to American
farmers in the cost OF agricultural i'm
PIGMENTS 1t has increased the for
eign trade in agricultural implements
four-fold in nine years: its foreign
sales in 1911 were over $4,000, 900.
1t has not sold cheaper abroad than
at home. Its treatment of it's custom
ers, Its employees. its agents, and its
competitors has been In accord wit,
the highest standard of esthics and
honorable business methods.
UPHELD IN MISSOURI.
THE charges of misconduct have
been disproved in other cases and
they will fail again. because thay are
untrue. The supreme cuort of Mis-
souri, said: ON the whole, the evidence
shows that the International Harves-
ter company has not used its power Ia