The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1913-11-05
BATTLE AGAINST
ALLEGED TRUST
Suit to Dissolve Harvester
Company Opens.
GROSVENOR SPEAKS FIRST
Special Assistant to the Attorney Gen.
eral Begins Argument for the Gov.
ernment Before Three Judges OF
the Circuit Court at St. Paul.


the Circuit Court at St. Paul.
st. Paul, Nov. Am a small court
room crowded with lawyers, judges Of
minor courts, business men and inter-
ested spectators the government open
ed it's last attack on the International
Harvester company and its subsidia-
ries as combination in restraint of
trade.
Circuit Judges w. III. Sanborn, w.
C. Hook and w. l.. Smith sat en- banc
For more than four hours they
heard Edwin p. Grosvenor, special as
sistant to the attorney general of the
United States, sum up the eighteen
printed volumes of evidence which has
been collected during the harvester
hearings and plead for an order to dis
solve the trust under the Sherman
law
On statement of counsel the court
limited the time of argument to five
hours for the government and seven
and one-half hours for the defense
I'VE maintain" said the special
counsel. that the very organization
OF the International Harvester com
pany Ii monopolistic. In August, 1902,
It took over fve companies giving
nothing but its stock.
Upon this structure IL developed a
business which originally sought only
to control the making of harvesters,
but which now controls the making
of every agricultural implement in the
United States, except plows. 1t has
not attempted to enter that field.
This combination in corporate form
has been expressly condemned by the
supreme court when ii applied its
t-..I~-s ------~--. 49, 4s~-----s
Standard Oil cases and the St Louis
Terminal association case.
Grosvenor Causes Smile.
Mr.. Grosvenor caused smile In the
courtroom when he quoted the opinion
of the supreme court in the Union Pa
cific-Southern Pacific case which
went up from the Minnesota court.
The Temple Iron company-anthra-
cite coal trust case-was cited by the
governments counsel as an example
OF the "rule OF reason" The cotton
corner case also was cited as basis
for applying the rule to the harvester
case.
'"The court held that the intent OF
running the corner was an act In re
straint of Interstate commerce, al
| though M corner was involved" he
said.
Other cases cited to bear out the
rule of reason argument were the Shoe
Machinery case, the Pacific Navfga
| ton case and the criminal case known
as the Naval Stores" case.
"In all these 1t has been held thai
| where defendants combined with ths
! intent, or in such way that the re
suit is a restraint of trade, it is illega
| and must dissolve" he said.
| Counsel for the government ther
launched into description of the har
vester business.
Business in these lines always ha!
principal ones In the order of thei
age are Mccormick, Osborn, Champion
and Deering. These names were ap
piled to the full line of binders. NOW
ers, rakes. shredders and binder twine
The manufacturers usually avoided tn
jobber and dealt directly with tn
dealer.
1T Is important to remember thes
things, because when the companie
were combined the dealers could no
only be forced to handle the wei
known brands but also to handle ne,
machines under these brands, such a
tractors, spreaders. etc."