New Britain herald., 1914-08-12
HARVESTER COMPANY
 ORDERED DISSOLVED
 BY DISTRICT COURT
Corporation Declared 10 Be MO' n6p0y in Restraint Of Interstate
 and Foreign Trade.
CASE WILL BE TAKEN
 TO SUPREME COUR1

Circuit Judge Walter I. smith o1
 Iowa With Whom Judge wiIlian}
 C. Hook of Kansas Concurs, HoldsI
 International Harvester CompanJ '
 Was From Its Organization i'm isO:|
 in Violation of sherman Law.
 St. Paul, Minn., Aug. 12.-The In1 ternational Harvester company todaI was declared to be a monopoly in re1 straint of interstate and foreign trad d and was ordered dissolved by ma jority decision of the judges filed herd by Judges Smith and Hook in thd United States court.
 Judge Walter Fl. Sanborn disse nted
 Unless the s140,000,000 corporation submit a plan for the dissolution oQ the com bination into at least three in ! dependent concerns within ninetyI days. or in case pf appeal within ninety days of the issuance of an ap-0 peal mandate from the United States supreme court, the decision announced that the court will entertain an ap-y plication for the appointment of ( receiver for all the properties of the corporation.
 Given By Judge smith.
 The decision of the court was giv- en by Circuit Judge Walter l. Smith of Iowa, with which Judge William Cl Hook of Kansas agreed, and from which Judge Walter H. Sanborn oq Minnesota dissented.
 The majority opinion held that the International Harvester company was from its organization in 1902 in viola tion of the sherman law. The origina corporation, formed of five concernsl violated the first section of the Sher man act by restraining competition. among themselves. The com binedI organization also tended to monopo lize trade in contravention of the second section of this law.
 Fair and Just.
 The decision declares that while the International Harvester company and its selling organization, the Inter- national Harvester Company of Amer ica, control from so to S5 per cent. ofl the trade in agricultural implements manufactured by them, their treat- ment of smaller competitors in gem eral has been fair and just.
 The court finds fault with the ac-I tions of the corporation, aside fromI the technical violation of the Sher- man law. for only two actions. TheI opinion declares thar there was noI excuse for the advertising of the pro-| ducts of D. M Osborne and com pa ny| as Independent for two years after itI had virtually entered the Internation-| al Harvester company. This advert Using was to induce purchasers, theI court finds, from those who were op-| posed to buying from the com mbina- ton.
 Other Act Ccnsured.
 The other act censured by the de- cision was the manner in which theI five original concerns were turned over to the International company byf C. Lane, a New York banker who contended that he had purchased the properties.
 The court holds, however, that the turned in to the Internation al company was greater than thd stock issued for if, and that the card involves no question of over capitali- ,ation.
 Cites Other Cases.
 The court cites portions of the de- ,ision in the cases of the Standard oil Co, the American Tobacco Co. he Du Pont De Nemours & Co, and ,ther cases as to what constitutes the of trade, reasonable and 
 History Is Reviewed.
 The decision reviews the history od he manufacture of harvesting imnie nents in the United States. a.sse rtin p hat prior to the organization of the Harvester company tbe manufacturers of harvestin e implements in the United States were The Mccormick Harvesting Ma hine Co., of Chicago, founded in bout 1S49.
 D. M. Osborne & Co., of Auburn N r., founded about 1860.
 The Warder, Bushnell and Glessner 'o., of Springfield. Ohio, founded bout 1869.
 The Deering Harvester Co, of Chi ago. founded about 1875.
 The Milwaukee Harvester Co. of Milwaukee.
 The Plano Manufacturing co. of Vest Pullman, III.
 Began in 1902.
 According to the decision, the norts to combine these concerns be- an on June 24. 1902. when n. ID. secured an option on the took and plant of the Milwaukae harvester co. for s3.12s,esI. He dld his." the decision says, lin fact as gent though it does not clearly ap- lContifnued nn Tleranth n.