OCR Text |
Show mm m - r :n i y rihSi lli I; WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 -Fighting I or Its life, the Standard OH com- pany through its attorneys todav ar- I l pied boforo the supreme court of the United States against the proposed dissolution of the Standard Oil com-i com-i pany of Now Jorsey. For tlireo hours, John G. Milburn, I f wv York, addressed tho court. ! Tomorrow Frank B. Kellogg, or Mln- nesota, will present the government's f side oftho controversy The arguments will not bo finished , . unUl Tuesday. .1 J . Wr. Mllburn's task was to present !(r t) V&c facts in the case, but ho digressed ; J fltw and then, to show what alleged S j "wrongs the affirmation of the dissolu- tion decree of tho lower court would ;i Incur. f i ! bis history of chaotic conditions I : Inthe oil business between 1SG0 and 1S70, due, he said, to an over-produc tion of refining capacity, Mr. Milburn I' , introduced to the court the character of. John D. Rockefeller. "Thero was in Cleveland," ho said, t "a young man in tho early CO's, with a small amount of money which lie I -4 bad saved, who possessed the gift of Senius. He had tho genius for busi- aess and there is a genius for business i Just as there is a genius for war, or poetry, or painting. That man was i John D. Rockefeller Tie saw that this" over-production of refineries was to bo mot by volume of business so eg to withstand tho lower profits." He then told how Rockefeller allied himself with Andrews, a practical oil refiner, and how tho exercise of Rockefeller's Rock-efeller's genius for husiness and their I subsequent good standing among fi- u Danders they grow rapidly. Mr. Mllbum dwelt particularly upon 1 the period of acquisition, which, he eaid, closed In 1S79, on the trust agreement of 1S92, and on tho new rrancomont of ownership in 1SS9. Acquisitions Ac-quisitions never had been made, Mr. 3Jilburn told tho court, with an intent to restrain or to monopolize Interstate trndo. Most of the purchases were made, he said, before 1S79. "Wo thought that It was the only decent thing to do, if a man came to ' us," said Mr Milburn. "with a propo- i i Bltion to sell out, to buy bis plant at its appraised value. OJtcn It was practically worthless, and we could havo permitted it to dry-rot in his j hands." a He denied the charges of the gov- 2 eminent that toecause the Standard Oil i) had tho advantage of alleged prefer- ! . , ences during tho period of acquisition, 'ft " Jt should now be punished. The con- ;J tracts between the railroads and the 2 I Standard wore not in rfoatraint of fl trade he continued, "when viewed in J U tho llsbt of tho days in which they were made." : Tho trust agreement of 1S92, where- i J by trustees exchanged their certifl- N- 7 catos for tho stock of the Various j , "common owners of Standard Oil coin- i J i panles, "camo In for much attention. L, I ' In connection therewith, Mr. Milburn ' ,' i maintained that the supreme court of Ohio did not decide that the "trust" j was illegal, but simply required the i Standard Oil company of Ohio to ' 1 I ' withdraw from tho trust agreement. i ' His extended remarks about the ; ' reorganization of tho Standard OH ' company of New York in 1599, which I Is the thing which the decree of the I lower court would undo, was suniinar- !ized by Justice Hughes. "The net result," suggested Justico : Hughes, "is that the Standard Oil i ' company of New Jersey after 1S99 stood in tho place of the trustees and those -who held the certificates Issued !by the trustees, thereafter held the j ' stock of the Standard Oil company of J ' New Jersey." , I "Proclsely." said Mr. Milburn; "it Ib quite simple when you undorstand it. L i I You see there was the same body of ' s l I common owner3 of the property both I i I ' before and after 1S99." |