The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-02-03
THE COFFEE AND OTHER TRUSTS

The end Of the government s prose.
cution of the coffee trust seems to be
rather impotent and Ineffective The
Government found that there was a
coffee trust, that it was holding
large store of coffee out Of the market,
and it orders that coffee sold. There
are no restrictions; probably there can
be no restrictions as to the bidders at
this sale; but since the coffee trust
owns that stored coffee, there is no
likelihood OF that trust allowing the
coffee to 90 ont of its own control. 1t
can either buy direct, or by dummy
bidders keep tho coffee within its own
grasp in spite Of anything that the
court may do; for since the Govern
ment has ordered it to be sold, it must
be sold to some one who will buy it.
The buyer will almost necessarily be
the coffee trust itself, or agents Of that
trust. In the meantime, the House
has passed a bill to prevent the inn
portation Of vslorized coffee; if the
Senate copcurs, the rise in price Of
coffee will be Immediately made, since
so large proportion of the coffee used
in this country comes from Brazil.
All this brings TO mind the similar
decree Of the u. s. Supreme Court iu
the matter of the Union and Southern
Pacific railroad trust as adjudged.
| The proposition of the Union Pacific to
distribute the Southern Pacific stock
which tho Union Pacific holds among
| the Union Pacific stockholders, was
| negatived by the court, and tho sale
| Of that stock ordered. But what is to
prevent agents or stockholders Of the
| Union Pacific buying that stock when
it is offered for saleg Suppose that the
stockholders OF the Union Pacific
should pool their interests, and au-
| thorize the stock to be bid in for them,
| selves at the sale ordered by the court;
| what could be done about it7 The way
| is entirely clear for them to do this;
| but if they can do this the result
will be precisely the samo as though
the Union Pacific g plan Of distribut-
ing that stock among its own stock
| holders had been allowed by the court
III the first place. Thus, the Union
Pacific stockholders can buy that stock
at the salo which is ordered by the
court and effect precisely the same re.
suit thereby as that which was ruled
against by the court,
| There docs not, in fact, either in
| the coffee trust suit or in the Union
Pacific suit, appear TO be any way to
avoid those who own property, having
| that property, nor should there be.
It was tho same thing in the Standard
Oil suit, and in the Tobacco trust suit,
Those who owned the property finally
got it, and there is no way for the
courts TO deny them the possession of
the property which they own. The rul-
ing of the court in these cases simply
amounted to an obstacle put in the
way Of the owners of the stock,
which obstacle was easy TO overcome
by walking around it. The owners of
the Standard Oil stock, OF the Tobacco
trust stock, of the coffee holdings, and
Of other properties of the kind that
have been in litigation, are in the long
run entitled to their property, and the
courts are powerless to deny them that
right; since, under the Constitution,
private property cannot be taken with
out just com pensation. The courts can
obs,ruct, but they cannot destroy.