Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1912-05-03

vester company, the defendants were
actuated, the petition declares bv a
determination to secure control of in.
terstate commerce in harvesting ma
chinery and twine and also to ex-
pand into other classes of agriculture
machinery with a purpose of monopo-
ly. The company was Incorporated in
New Jersey with a capaital stock orig.
inally of s120,00O,000. The control of
the capital stock was placed in the
hands of three voting trustees-Cyrus
H. Mccormick, Charles Deering and
George W. Perkins, who issued stock
trust certificates TO the persons actin.
ally owning the stock.
In explaining the disposition of the
stock, the petition says that s3,451. 500
was issued to j. P. Morgan & Co.. for
underwriting services and legal ex-
penses and S3,14S,197 to the same firm
in reimbursements for the cash exnend.
ed to secure the property of the Mil
waukee Harvester company.
The absorbed Milwaukee Harvester
company was converted into the In
ternational Harvester COMPANY of
America through which the alleged
trust sells exclusively its entire out
put in the United States.
The International Harvester com.
pany OF America is merely the selling
agency of the other international COM
pany," continues the petition. Since
its acquisition by the International
Harvester company it has paid no div
idends upon its capital stock, 81, 900, 900.
1t buys and sells at the prices fixed
by the parent company. In fact, the
Wisconsin company is a bookkeeping
arrangement, given the form of a
corporate entity, with a small capital
ization for the purpose of enabling the
larger company to do business in
states from which it is debarred by
reason Of its huge capitalization.
THE arrangement between the In
ternational Harvester company, and
International Harvester company of
America was further devised and is
now being carried out by the defend.
ants for the purpose of giving to the
New Jersey company the appearance
OF not being engaged to accomplish an
ostensible segregation of the manufac-
turing or intrastate business of the
corporation from its distributing or in
trastate business, thereby securing to
the latter protection against the laws
of the several states which have for
their object the suppression of monop-
n
ders."
The petition asks that this company
be decreed an unlawful organization in
restraint Of trade.
Pointing out that as a rule agri-
cultural implements are sold direct by
the manufacturers to the retail dealer,
eliminating the usual wholesaler or
jobber, the petition accuses the har-
vester company of endeavoring to &C
quire control of these retail merchants
scattered over the country in every
city, town, village and hamlet. The
means of accomplishing this in 1908,
1904 and 1905, it is declared, was
through contracts making these deal
ers exclusive sales agents of the de-
PENDANTS and binding them under pen
alties mot TO sell or be interested in
the sale of any grain binder, header,
corn binder, husker. shredder, reaper,
mower, stacker, sweep rake, hay rake
or hay tedder not manufactured by the
defendant International Harvester
company"
During the succeeding years down
to the present, it is charged, the com
pany exercised like control and dom
ination over a great majority of retail
implement dealers in the country by
means OF agency contracts which may
be annulled by the International Har-
vester company Of America when it
considers its interests neglected or
jeopardized. The defendants, it is de-
clared, are using this termination
! clause to force the retail dealers to
handle only the product of the Inter
national Harvester company and are
thus promoting their new lines of i'm
plements, as well as harvesting ma
chimes
The petition alleges that the Interna-
tional Harvester company in January,
1908, acquired control of the D. NJ. o.
borne & Co., its principal competitor
in harvesting machinery and tillage
implements, but for two years con-
cealed and denied its association with
that company.
This" it is added, was in pursu-
ance of defendants policy, by disguis-
I ing ownership. to use controlled COM
/ panies to break down competition and
! secure for themselves the benefit of
public sentiment against combina-
{ tons"
/ Other companies, whose acquisition
it is alleged was concealed for a
/ time, included the Aultman Miller COM
pany OF Akron, Minnie Harvester COM
pany of Minnesota, and the Key Stone
company of Illinois.
The harvester company receives it's
raw materials-iron, steel and lum-
ber-thTough the Wisconsin Steel
company and the Wisconsin Lumber
company, subsidiaries, which the petit
ton declares are used as means and
instrumentalities TO eliminate compe.
tition."
1t is alleged that the defendants
have used the Illinois Northern rail-