The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1917-10-02
BIG TRUST SUITS
TO FRONT AGAIN


washington. Oct. 2--Five big anti
trust cases involving the dissolution OF
the United States Steel Corporation. the
international Harvester company. the
United shoe Machinery company and
the Lehiah Valley railroad and the
Reading companies and affiliated coal
companies. the so-cailed anthracite coal
trust cases. together with proceedings
from four states 20 test the constitu-
tionaliey OF the draft law. are before
the United States supreme court, which
reconvened yesterday. following the an
nuai summer recess
Among the first cases disposed OF IL
is expected. will be those growing out OF
the enforcement Of the draft law. IL
these were permitted 10 come up IN
their regular order. they would not be
reached for eighteen months. but AT.
torney General Gregory plans 10 ask
that they be advanced for early deci-
don. While government officials. and
especially those connected with the war
department. feel there IL no question
about the validity OF the law. a decision
by the highest court would do much
TO discourage contrary sentiment man
ifested in various sections OF the coun-
try.
Appeals from the decision of Judge
Speer in Georgia. who upheld the con
stitutionality OF the law, and cases from
Minnesota. Ohio and New York. which
include those OF Emma Goldman and
Alexander Berkman. convicted Of at
tempting to oppose the carrying into
effect OF the law by urging men within
the draft ages not 10 register. have
been filed. All are expected to be de-
cided at the same time
Big Antitrust Suits.
Dates have not been fixed for the hear
ing of arguments in the antitrust suits.
These cases were argued last term. Ru-
.mors that owing To the war. action on
them would be delayed until after peace
was declared were met by Chief JUS
tice White ordering them re-argued at
this session The cases stand near the
top Of the docket and unless delays oc-
cur. court officials expect the Harvester
and the anthracite trust cases to come
up for consideration this month and
the others shortly afterwards. This viii
be the second time the steel and the
shoe machinery cases have been argued
and the third time for the harvester
and the anthracite suits.
The harvester case was appealed 20
the supreme court from the Minnesota
federal court. which in 1914. ordered the
dissolution of the company and its sub
sidiary organizations, combining SPA
100000 assets, as being in violation OF
The Sherman law. The government
maintains that the mere combining OF
competitive traders, voluntary or 9TH
erwise. into a -preponderant or domi-
nant position in an industry constitutes
in itself a violation of the antitrust
laws. The defendants claim that a dis
solution decree is not justified Oh the
grounds OF mere size and power. con-
tending furthermore that the so-called
Harvester trust is good" combina-
ton.
The enormous size and power alleged
TO be exercised in suppressing competi-
fion are the principal reasons upon
which the dissolution OF the United
States Steel Corporation is asked by the
government. Suit was brought in the
New Jersey federal district court in
1911 but was dismissed four years later
by Judges Burlington. Mcpherson,
Wooley and Hunt, who held that. al
though the corporation was formed for
the purpose Of Illegally monopolizing
and restraining trade, it has not been
able alone to fix and maintain prices
and is not an actual monopoly. The
government at once appealed the case
and it was argued in March, 1917
Shoe Machinery Cases
The proceeding in the shoe machinery
case was instituted in the Massachu-
setts federal district court in 1911. but
was dismissed after voluminous testi-
mony had been taken. the court sustain
ing the defendants on all grounds This
case also was argued before the su-
preine court in March. 1917. and later
was ordered re-argued this term. The