OCR Text |
Show OIL TRUST FILES BRIEMHDEFENSE Makes !,'Individual Rights" the Main Point Insisted Upon in Justification. MKX WHO -RUN COMBINE ALLEGED TO P,E UPRIGHT Work in Developing Resources and Perfecting Methods Should Be Regarded. WASHINGTON, .March S. The "Standard Oil" today filed in tho supreme su-preme court of the United States its brief in opposition to the attempt of the government to dissolve it a3 violating violat-ing the Sherman anti-trust law. Tin's comes as a prelude to the oral argument of the caso made b- attorneys attor-neys for the defense and for the government. gov-ernment. Tho brief is tho work of IX T. Watson. John M. Freeman and Ernest Ern-est C. Irwin. The brief of the government, govern-ment, "has not yet. been filed. The kevnote of tho defense is the so called 'preservation of tho "rights of individual citizens of the . United Slates." . , . . - The issue, according to this bricf( is the charge made in tho petition, denied in tho answer and reasserted m the reply, that the seven individual defendants, de-fendants, .lohn D. Rockefeller. William H. Rockefeller. John V. Archbold, Oliver Oli-ver Ji. Payne. Henrv M. Flagler, Charlos M. Pratt and Henry 11. Rogers, combined com-bined and conspired, and continued to combine and conspire at tho time the petition was filed, to restrain interstate trade in oil and to gain a monopoly of . The brief asserts that, tho circuit court of the United Slates for the eastern east-ern district of Missouri, whose adverse decree the defendants seek to overturn, held that solely because these individual joint owners of a group of noncompetitive noncompet-itive properties engaged for forty years in private trade instead of continuing to hold through trustees controlled hy these defendants, changed in ISO!), as the brief says, "tho method of holding their properties by convoying them to the Standard Oil company of New Jersey, Jer-sey, and that such change was a violation viola-tion of the Sherman anti-trust act." Claim Obcdlon.ce to Law. This decree is complained of as being be-ing unjust to the men who, according to the brief, "were a lawful group, lawfully doing business," and who, after aft-er what is described as a mere conveyance convey-ance and solely by reason thereof became be-came a "group' of lawless conspirators," it is charged. The claim that, the seven individuals arc engaged in lawful business is cm phasized. "The Standard Oil business as it existed ex-isted in fUG and still exists," sa3s the brief, "was tho natural development and outgrowth of the business begun in 1SG2 and steadily pursued by tho Rockefellers Rock-efellers and others." By untiring energy, with infuiito skill, with abundant capital and tho steady reinvestment of earlier prolits, theso men and their associates created out of an entirely new, unique and unprecedented un-precedented production of crude oil a new. univcrpall' used and tho cheapest illuminant tho world has known. 73y creative skill they secured from refuso oil valuable by products. They invented invent-ed the huge reservoirs for storing oil the combined pipe lino system which gathers up and carries tho natural products prod-ucts the tank cars which carry the refined re-fined product 8. "They created the export trade in oil, transportiug it m snips of their own construction and selling it in Asia, India. China, Japan, Russia and all Europe. They devised tho trading stations sta-tions tho tank delivery wagons and used every means to cheapen tho product prod-uct and improve tho quality. Long Years of Risk. "From 1SG2 to 190G forly-four years tho work went on. They took the risk of tho failure in production, of destruction by lire nnd tempest, besides all tho ordinary risks of trade. The' met all emergencies with competent skill and sufficient funds. Tho unexpected, unex-pected, enormous incrcaso in production produc-tion greatly increased their business, added to its importance and profit. "Their methods of holding their joint properties and tho management of them woro dictated by economic reasons. "They used the best and cheapest methods" in tho holding of titles and in the transportation, production, rclluin and pale of oil. and they sought to and always did produco tho best and cheapest cheap-est product. "They competed with tho same cn-crgv cn-crgv anil skill they built up. ''They succeeded, as if one had developed de-veloped unexpectedly a gold or diamond dia-mond mine, and abundant revenue legitimately becamo theirs. "Their business thus created, was a lawful ono and tho owners thereof were and nro lawfully entitled to continue con-tinue the same, and if in 1U0G whon the petition was filed they were not restricting re-stricting iuterslato trade or by unlawful unlaw-ful means seeking a monopoly (which it was not), the court should not havo interfered with it." Only Change of Method. Point after point is made by counsel, coun-sel, in an attempt lo prove that the seven sev-en individual defendants did nothing more than change their method of business busi-ness in 1S90. "Seven men, controlling for .0()0 people, peo-ple, seventy parcels of properly do voted to private business enterprise and for which the 5000 hold trusr certificates of trustees, in 1S00 determine that thereafter there-after tho 5000 shall hold stock certificates certifi-cates of tho New Jersey Standard Oil company for the snino properties in the same proportions and with tho same power and management. "Neither the 5000 owners nor the seven managers gained any new power or property or changed I heir status or smothered competition Iv the change but thev did gain, as thoy think, an easier and more economic method of holding and managing tho joint properties. prop-erties. Thev did not intend to, nor did they manage the properties r-t'lcr 1S00, except as they managed them before, and they had no idea of rcplricring com petition between their jointly held properties, prop-erties, bccati.se there was none to restrict." re-strict." Attacks Court's Ruling. Tho position of the circuit court that boiue of tho companies in the organization organiza-tion of 1S00. "wore potent iall.y and nat ii rally competitive" ami that their competition com-petition was prevented bv this organization organiza-tion of ISOfi is attacked! "Wo submit.'7 says Hie brief, "that the idea, of competition between properties proper-ties all owned by the pa mo persons is a novelty. The idea that properties themselves them-selves compete, and that, if one man owns two or more he must couipcto with himself, is startling. Competition between be-tween ioint owners is also novel.'' The counsel for I ho "Standard Oir-contend Oir-contend that competition is the striving of two or more persons, or corporations, for trade. . , The ownership of properties, it is contended con-tended in the brief, is wholly under the laws of the stale and congress cannot, and does not, pretend lo regulate their acquisition. Vet. it is urged by counsel for tlio Standard Oil that tliis rule of t ho circuit court; would broaden the Sherman act. so that a federal lav -would regulate land titles in the stale. Tho objections to the decree nro summed lip in tho statements that it id too general, loo vague, too indefinite, loo broad. "It denies to each individual tlic right of holding bis properly as he chooses." sav counsel, "either. by legal or equitable title." |