Morning Oregonian., May 16, 1911, Page 6, Image 6

6
THE MORXTNG OREGOXTAN. TUESDAY MAT 16, 1911.
STANDARD OIL TO
DIE IH 6
CHIEF JUSTICE OP SUPREME COURT, WHO BEAD OPINION DISSOLVING STANDARD OIL COMPANY,
AND MAGNATES WHO CONTROL THE TRUST.
Supreme Court Orders Big
Monopoly to Dissolve as
Against Law.
SOME RESTRAINTS
Gorernjiieot'a Attack on Oil Monop.
oly Upheld a Every Point Pur-
poe of Company Declared to
Bo Trade Monopoly.
BISTORT Or THE THCST AND
M. IT TO DHHlLVt IT.
1M3 Joha IX Rorbsfsller stsrtsl
ta the oil bastaess with H
1&S -Rocksfelitr btarnt the o-sroer
of a refinery la Cleveland.
I;ik Orsaatsatloa f Standard 0!l
company of Ohio by r.rksfetlr and
etnsrs.
1S71 etoutti ImproTsmeet Company
arrm&sad for rebates from rstlrood.
13.79 Orxsalsatma of -VUs-KIU-Caester
Trusx."
1132 rwanlaatloo of so-called
"Standard Oil Iran."
15SO Fasssce of Bbormaa anti
trust act.
1J Dissolution of "Standard Oil
Trust.
Reorganisation of Standard
OU Csmparr of Now Jersey aa hali
tes company.
ntln of petition for d
Ivtlooj of Standard.
mo Circuit Court at St. Leuls de
crees dissolution ask id for by Got.
ernmsnt.
1K10-Appeal to Supreme Court of
toe Called Stataa
aormmo Coon ardors dlseo-
railon.
(Cwotlsned From TTrmt pace.)
opinion, bat not once referring to It In
order to refresh h la memory.
Before blm aat an audience of tho
moat (uBOtu man of tho country. Sen
ators and Representatives left their
chambers la the Capitol to llatan to the
epoch-making decision of the court
Vost eager to hear were Attorney
General Wlckenshatn and frank J.
Kellogg, special counsel for the Qov
emraent. who had conducted the great
nght against the Standard oil.
Today, aa on previous decision days
for months, rlral brokers' agents with
messengers In line to the various tele
phone and telegraph Instruments
throughout the capital, were on hand,
but to their dismay the announcement
Bf the decision was not begun until an
hoar after the close of the stock mar
kets.
Tobacco Irrclvlon May SI.
Many expected tbat the decision In
the dissolution suit against the tobacco
corporation would be handed down Im
mediately after the decision In the
Standard Oil case. This waa not done.
However, the decision la expected on
May it, the last decision day of the
court nntll next October.
The opinion of the court waa con
ttrued to mean that the tobacco case,
like every other case la which re
straints of trade are alleged, must be
subject to the new test of reasonable
ness of the restraint, aa laid down In
the Standard Oil decision.
Reason Mat Rule.
MONTHS
b: - -,vr
I COPyX TGHT "JS
tsse- e 9 ., . 1 Ji-iia- . 1 1 , . , 1 TT
B . r .- ' .a I V - . . I It- v-- J
if i i -ii'Tsst rmimtuL 1 ' i 1 r- -a
By far the greater portion of the
opinion of the Chief Justice
was devoted to the Justifica
tion of the court In requiring that
the "rule of reason" be applied to re
straints of trade before they were held
to be violations of the Sherman anti
trust law. The court found this jus
tification In the common law and in
the general law of the country at the
time the Sherman anti-trust law waa
passed. In short, the court held that
the technical words of the statute were
to be glvon the meaning which those
words had In the common law and In
the law of the country at the time of
the enactment. This meaning of the
words, according to the court, called
for the exercise of reason In determin
ing what restraints on trade were pro
hibited. Case Rests on Law Interpretation.
Chief Justice White la his opinion
first reviewed the preliminary proceed
ings ta the case In the Circuit Court
of the United States for the Eastern
District of Mlaaourl. lie reatated the
essential points in the bill of the Gov
ernment asking for the dissolution of
the Standard Oil Company, and the an
swer questioning the Jurisdiction of the
court and denying the claims of the
Oovernment. He dismissed the objec
tion to the Jurisdiction In a few words
by holding that It was not well found
ed.
He then came to the ariruments as
to the law and the saying that
out f the "June" of law and facts
both sides were agreed that the deter
mination of the controversy rested
upon proper construction and applica
tion of the nrst and second aecttos of
tho anti-trust act. The views of the
two sites aa to the law. the Chief
Justice said, were aa wMe apart as the
po,e. The same, he said, was true as
to the facta.
"Thus on the one hand with relent
less pertinacity and minuteness of
anaJysla. said the Chief Justice, "it ta
Insisted that the facts established that
the assailed combination took Its birth
la a purpose unlawfully to acquire
wealth by oppressing the public and de
stroying the Just rights of others and
that Its entire career exemplifies an in
exorable carrying out of such wrongful
Interns, since. It Is asserted, tie pathway
of the combination from the beginning
to the time of the filing of the bill Is
marked with constant proofs of wrong
Inf'.tcted upon the public and Is strew q
with the wrecks resulting from erusblng
out. without regard to law. the Individual
rights of others.
Trust Panrrr to freedom.
"It Is asserted that the existence of
the principal corporate defendant, the
Standard Oil Company of New Jersey,
with its vast accumulation of property,
bexmuse of tta potency for harm and tho
dangerous example which Its continued
existence af orris, la an open and endur
ing menace to ail freedom of trade and
reproach to all modern economic
methods.
"On the other band. In a powerful
analysis of the facts. It la Insisted they
have demonstrated that the origin and ,
development of the vast business which
the defendants control was but the re
sult of lawful competitive methods
guided by economic genius of the highest
order, sustained by courage, by a keen
Insight Into the commercial situation.
resulting In the acquisition of great
wealth, but at the same time serving to
stimulate an Increased production, to
widely extend the distribution of the
products of petroleum at a cost largely
below tbat which would otherwlee have
prevailed, taxis proving to be at one and
the same'tlrae a benefaction to the gen
eral publta as well as an enormous ad
vantage to Individuals." r
In this state of affairs the Chief Jus
tice selxed upon the single point of
concord, namely, the, application of the
two sections or the bnerman anu-truet
law. as the lnltal beats of an examina
tion of the contention. The rest of his
opinion divided Itself Into a consideration
of the meaning of the Sherman anti
trust law In the light of the common law
and of the law of the United States at
the time of Its adoption, the contentions
of he parties concerning the act and the
scope and effect of the decisions of the
Supreme Court the application of the
statute to the facta and lastly the
remedy.
Meaning of Law Sought.
In striving to get at the meaning of
the two sections of the lew, be said
the sole subject with which, the first
section dealt was "restraint of trade,
nd that the "attempt to mononollx
and monopolization" was the subject of
the second section. e
The Chief Justice said that In get
ting at the meaning of these words he
would be guided by the principle thai
where words are employed In a statute
hlch at the time bad a well-known
meaning la common law or In the law
of this country, they were presumed to
have been so used In this case unless
the context compelled to the contrary.
He summarised his search into the
common law and the law of the coun
try at the time the Sherman anti-trust
law waa passed, so far as the first sec-
tion was concerned, as follows:
A That the context manifests that
the statute waa drawn In the light of
the existing practical conception of the
law of restraint of trade, because It
groups as within that class not only
contracts which were In restraint of
trade In the subjective sense, but all
contracts or acts which theoretically
were attempts to monopolise, yet which
In practice had come to be considered
aa in restraint OI traae in a Droaa
sense.
B That In view of the many forms
of contracts and combinations which
were being evolved from existing eco
nomic conditions. It was deemed essen
t'al by an all-embracing enumeration
to make sure thst no form of contract
or combination by which an undue re
straint of Interstate or foreign com
merce was brought about could save
such restraint from condemnation. The
statute under this view evinced the In
tent not to restrain the right to make
and enforce contracts, whether result
tnc from combination or otherwise.
which did not unduly restrain Inter
state or foreign commerce but to pro
tect that commerce from being
atralned by methois. whether old or
new, which would constitute an Inter
ference that Is an undue restraint.
"C And. as the contracts or acts em
braced In the provision were not ex
pressly defined, since the enumeration
addressed Itself simply to classes of
acts, those classed being broad enough
to embrace every conceivable contract
or combination which could be made
concerning commerce or the subjects of
such commerce, and thus caused any
act done by any of the enumerated
methods anywhere In the whole field
of human activity to be Illegal If In
restraint of trade. It Inevitably follows
that the provision necessarily called
for the exercise of Judgment which re
quired that some standard should be
resorted to for the purpose of deter
mining whether the prohibitions con
tained In the statute had or had not
In any given case been violated.
"Thus, not specifying but tndubltably
contemplating and requiring a stan
dard. It follows that It was Intended
that the standard of reason which had
been applied to the common law and
the law la this country In dealing with
subjects of the character embraced by
the statute waa intenaea to oe the
measure used for the purpose of deter
mining whether In a given case a par
ticular act had or had not brought
about the wrong against which the
statute provided."
to the second sec Lion, no said
the Investigation of the common law
and of law at the time the Sherman
act was established showed that it was
Intended to aupplement the first and
to make sure that by no possible guise
could the public policy embodied In the
first section be. frustrated or evaded.
Having In the first section forbidden all ,
Above, Snapshot of Johm D. Rockefeller
sad Portrait of Chief Justice White.
Below, William Rockefeller, II. M.
Flagler and Joaa D. Archhold. (Phots
Copyrighted by George GraatJ
Bala.)
means of monopolising trade, that Is,
unduly restraining It by means of every
contract combination, etc. the second
section, according to the Chief Justice,
"seeks. If possible, to make the pro
hibition of the act all the more com
plete and perfect by embracing all at'
tempts to reach the end prohibited by
the first section by any attempt to mo
nopolise, even although the acts by
which such results are attempted to be
Drought about, or are brought about,
be not embraced within the general
enumeration 01 tne nrst section."
Rale of Reason Is Guide..
Here the Chief Justice first spoke of
using tne "rule or reason" In apply
lng the statute to any given case. Ha
said:
"And of course when the second sec
tion Is thus harmonized with and
made, as It was Intended to be, the
complement of the first, it becomes ob
vlous that the criteria to be resorted to
In any given oase to ascertain whether
violations of the section have been com
mitted Is the rule of reason guided by
the esabltshed law and by the plain
duty to enforce the prohibitions of the
act and thus the publlo policy which
Its restrictions were obviously enacted
to subserve.
it is worthy of observation, as we
have previously remarked concerning
the common law. that, although the
statute by the comprehensiveness of
the enumerations embodied In the first
and second sections makes It obviously
certain that its purpose was to pre
vent undue restraints of every kind or
nature, nevertheless by the omission of
any direct prohibition against monop
oly in tne concrete, it indicates a con
sciousness that the freedom of the In
dividual right to contract, when cot
unduly or Improperly exercised, waa
the most efficient means for the pre
vention of monopoly, since the opera-
t-.V''
'j-
-.it
Fraak B. Kellogg, Who as Spe
cial Preaoeator SaerewafnJIy
roadnetew Standard Oil Case for
Goverasaeat, - .
tlon of the centrfugal and centripetal
forces resulting from the t4bt to free
ly contract was the me. ass by which
monopoly would be Inevitably pre
vented. If no extraneoua or sovereign
power Imposed It and no right to make
unlawful contracts having a monopo-
'stle tvdency were permitted.
In oWer words, the freedom to con-
ract was the essence of freedom from
undue restraint on the right to contract."
The Chief Justice next considered the
contention of the parties as to the
meaning of the statute. He said. In
substance, the propositions of the Gov
ernment were reducible to the claim
that the language of the statute em
braced "every contract, combination,
etc.. In restraint of trade," and left no
room for the exercise of Judgment but
simply Imposed the plain duty of ap
plying Its prohibitions to every case
within its liberal language.
The error of the Government on this
point. Chief Justice White said, was In
assuming that the 'decisions of the
court had decided In accord with. Its
Intentions.
"This is true, because, aa the acta
which may come under the classes
stated In the first section and the re
straint of trade to which that section
applies are not specifically enumerated
or defined. It is obvious that Judgment
must In every case be called Into play
In order to determine whether a par
ticular act Is embraced within the
1 statutory classes, and whether, if the
act Is within such classes. Its nature
or effect causes It to be a restraint of
trade within the Intendment of the
act." said the Chief Justice.
'To hold to the contrary would re
quire the conclusion either that every
contract, act or . combination of any
kind or nature, whether 'It operated In
restraint of trade or not, was within
the statute and thus the statute would
be destructive of all right to contract
or agree or combine -in any respect
whatever aa to subjects embraced in
Interstate trade or commerce; or. If
this conclusion were not reached, then
the contention would require It to be
held that, as the statute did not define
the things to which It, .related and ex
cluded resort to the only means by
which the acts to which It relates could
be ascertained the light of reason the
enforcement of the statute was Impos
sible because of Its uncertainty."
"The merely generio enumeration
which the statute makes of tbe acts to
which It refers and the absence of any
definition of restraint of trade as used
In the statute leaves room for but one
conclusion, which Is that it Is expressly
designed not to limit unduly the appli
cation of the act by precise definition
but, while clearly fixing a standard, that
Is, by defining the ulterior boundaries
which could not be transgressed with
Impunity, to leave It to be determined
by the light of reason, guided by the
principles of law and the duty to apply
and enforce the publlo policy embodied
In the statute In every given case,
whether any particular act or contract
was within the contemplation of the
statute." j
Harlan's Objection Answered.
At this point Chief Justice White
touched upon the phase of tbe case
which formed the basis of Justice Har
lan's dissenting opinion, it was that the
opinions of the Supreme Court In the
cases of the United States vs. the
Freight Association and the United
States vs. the Joint Traffic Association
excluded the right thus to reason in in
terpreting the statute. Chief Justice
White said the general language of those
onlnlons had been subsequently ex
plained and held not to Justify the broad
significance attributed to them.
And In order not In the ellghtest de
gree to be wanting in frankness." said
the Chief Justice, "we say that. Insofar,
however, as by separating the general
language used In the opinions in the
Freight Association and Joint Traffic
cases from the context rnd the subject
and parties with which the cases were
concerned. It may be conceived that the !
language referred to conflicts with the
constructions which were given the stat
ute, they are necessarily now limited and
qualified."
'We see no possible escape from this
conclusion If we are to adhere to the
many cases decided in this court In
which the anti-trust law has been ap
plied and enforced, and if ths duty to
apply and enforce that law In the fut
ure Is to continue to exist. The first Is
true, because the construction which
we now gi-e the statute does not in
the slightest degree conflict with a sin
gle previous case decided concerning
the anti-trust law, aside from the con
tention as to the freight association
and Joint traffic cases, and because
every one of those cases applied the
rule of reason for the purpose of deter
mining whether the subject before the
court was within the statute.
The second also is true, since, as we
have already pointed out, unaided by
the light of reason, -It la Impossible to
understand how the statute may In 'the
future be enforced and the public pol
icy which It establishes be made effica
cious.
The Chief Justice next toon up the
facts and the application of the statute
to them. Aa a matter of fact, the court
found that the result of enlarging the
capital stock of the Standard Oil Com
pany of New Jersey and the acquisition
by that company of the shares of stock
of the other corporations in exchange
for Its certificates gave to the corpora
tion an enlarged and more perfect sway
and control over the trade and com
merce In petroleum and its products.
The effect of this. Chief Justice White
said, the lower court held was to de
stroy "the potentiality of competition,"
which otherwise would have existed to
such an extent as to be a combination
or conspiracy In restraint of trade, in
violation of the first section of the act,
and also be an attempt to monopolize.
and a. monopollzatson would bring
about a perennial violation of the sec
ond section. v
"""We see no cause to doubt the cor
rectness of these conclusions." said the
Chief Justloe, "considering the subject
from every aspect: that Is, both in view
of the facts established by the record
and the necessary operation and effect
of the law .as we have construed It
upon the Inferences deductble from tbe
facts for the following reasons:
Big; Company Implies Monopoly.
"A Because the unification of power
and control o,ver petroleum and Its
products which was the Inevitable re
sult of the combining in the New Jer
sey corporation by the increase ef Its
stock and the transfer to It of the
stocks of so many other corporations,
aggregating' so vast a capital, gives
rise, in and of itself in the absenoe of
countervailing' circumstances, to say
the least, to the prima facie presump
tion of intent and purpose to maintain
the domlnancy over the oil Industry,
not as a result of normal methods of in
dustrial development, but by new
means of combination which were re
sorted to in order that greater power
might be added than would otherwise
have arisen had normal methods been
followed, the whole with the purpose of
excluding others from the trade and
thus centralizing in the combination a
perpetual control of the movements of
petroleum and Its products In ths chan
nels of interstate commerce."
Intent to Monopolize Proved.
"B Because the prima facie presump
tion of Intent to restrain trade, to mon
opolize and to bring about monopoliza
tion resulting from the act of expand
ing the stock of the New Jersey corpor
ation and vesting it with such control
of the oil Industry Is made -conclusive
by considering, (1) the-conduct of the
persons or corporations who were mainly
Instrumental In bringing about the ex
tension of power In the New Jersey cor
poration before the consummation of
that result and prior to the formation
or tne trust agreements or istv ana ja&:
(2) by considering the proof as to what
was done under those agreements and
the acts which Immediately preceded
the vesting of power In the New Jersey
corporation, as well as by weighing the
modes In wrflch the power vested In
that corporation had been exerted and
the results which have arisen from it."
Conclusion. Is Inevitable.
In subjecting to scrutiny the acts and
doings of the Standard Oil Company in
the long distant past for the purpose of
discovering Intent and purpose, the
Chief Justice said:
"We think no disinterested mind can
survey the period in question without
being Irresistibly driven to the conclu
sion that the very genius for commercial
development and organization, which it
would seem was manifested from the
beginning, soon begot an intent and
purpose to exclude others, frequently
manifested by acts and dealings wholly
noonslstent with the theory that they
were made with the single conception
of advancing the development of bus!
ness power by usual methods, but which
on the contrary necessarily Involved the
Intent to drive others from the field and
to exclude them from their right to trada
and thus accomplish the mastery which
was the end In view.
"And, considering the period from the
date of the trust agreements of 1879
and 1SS2 up to the time of the expan
sion of the New Jersey corporation, tbe
gradual extension of power over the
commerce in oil which ensued, the deci
sion of the Supreme Court of Ohio,
the tardiness and reluctance in conform
ing to the commands of that decision,
the method first adopted and that which
finally culminated In the plan of the
New Jersey corporation, all additionally
served to make manliest the continued
existence of the intent which we have
previously Indicated and which, among
other things. Impelled the expansion of
the New Jersey corporation.
"The exercise of the power which re
sulted from that organization fortifies
the foregoing conclusions, since the de
velopment which came, the acquisition
here and there which ensued, of every
efficient means by which competition
could have been asserted, the slow but
resistless methods which followed by
which means of transportation were ab
sorbed and brought under control, the
system of marketing which was adopted
by which the country was divided into
districts and the trade in each district
turned over to a designated coiporatlon
within the combination and ail others
excluded, ail lead the mind up to a
conviction of a purpose and Intent which,
we think. Is so certain as practically to
cause the subject not to bo within ths
domain of reasonable contention."
Knight Decision Unsound.
The Chief Justice at one point in
his opinion took up some of the con
tention of the defendants, particularly
that based on tbe famous Knight case
criticised last Fall by ex-President
Roosevelt. The contention was that
the Sherman anti -trust law could not
be applied to the Standard Oil because
to do so would be to extend the power
of Congress to subjects beyond the
reach of its authority to regulate in
terstate commerce by enabling that
body to deal with mere questions of
production of commodities within the
states.
The Chief Justice said that this con
tention as to the holding of the Knight
case was unsound and required no ex
press notice beyond tbat given it in
cases already decided.
The court then considered the argu
ments that the statute could not be
j applied under the facts in the case
without impairing rights of property
and destroying the freedom of contract
of trade, which is essentially neces
sary to the wellbelng of society.
"But the ultimate foundation of all
these arguments," said the Chief
Justice, "is the assumption that reason
may not be resorted to in interpreting
and applying the statute and therefore
that the statute unreasonably restricts
the righf to contract and unreasonably
operates upon the right to acquire and
hold property. As the premise is dem
onstrated to be unsound by the con
struction we have given the statute,
of course, the propositions which rest
upon that premise need not be further
noticed."
Dissolution Is Ordered.
Finally the Chief Justice came to ap
ply the remedy. He said that ordi
narily, where violations of the act
were found to have been committed it
would suffice to .enjoin further viola
tions. In a case, however, where a monop
olization or attempt to monopolize was
established, or the existence of a combi
nation la proven, the continuance of
which was a perennial violation of the
statute, further relief was called for.
The lower court, he pointed out, had
first enjoined the combination and in
effect directed Its dissolution: second,
forbidden the New Jersey corporation
from exercising any control by virtue
of Its stock ownership over the sub
sidiary corporations, and enjoined these
corporations from recognizing in any
manner the authority or power of the
SEASONABLE SPECIALTIES
"WOODLARK" OIL OF CALIFORNIA OLIVES
Half Pints, 30c;' Pints, 50c; Quarts, 85c;
" Half Gallons, $1.75; Gallons, . $3.50
Pure and Healthful. There's golden sun
shine in it. Expressed from perfect fruit
grown in California's sunny olive groves.
THERMOS, THE BOTTLE, $3.75 UP
Keeps boiling liquids hot for 2-4 hours;
keeps ice-cold liquids cold three days; at
once a luxury, a convenience, and a neces
sity. "We have them in all needed sizeg.
Let us give you a descriptive, illustrated
catalogue. .
JETUM 25c
Gives new life and a glossy color, to old
straw hats, leather belts, and metal work.
Black, blue, green, brown and red.
"WOODLARK" PANA-BLANCO 25c
Cleans and restores the color of Panama'
hats and canvas shoes. Put your hat in
order for the first warm, sunny day.
SANITARY PAPER BLANKETS 50c
Healthful; warm. Made of strong kid
finish, sterilized paper. Use them between
sheet and top cover, avoiding the depres
sing weight of blankets and thick counter-
panes. .
WOODARD, CLARKE & CO.
"Washington and Fourth Streets
Eemember our great sale of travelers'
luggage is in progress. Every article re
duced in price.
J
New Jersey corporation by virtue of
such owneship: third, enjoined in the
sixth section of the decree the subsidi
ary corporations, after the dissolution,
rxbm doing any act which could create
a like Illegal combination; fourth, en
Joined the New Jersey corporation and
all the subsidiary corporations from
doing any business in interstate com
merce pending the dissolution of the
combination by the accomplishment of
the transfer of stocks which the de
cree In Its essence required; and, fifth,
gave SO days to carry out the directions
of the court.
The court said this decree was right
and should be affirmed, except as to
what are termed "minor matters." One
of these was the extension of the time
within which the decree should be put
into effect from one month to six
months.
tlon the subserviency of corporate In
terests to the law of the land." '
Some Agreements Allowed.
The other modification, was more lnv
portant and had to do with the sixth
section of the decree, which forbade the
formation by the subsidiary corpora
tions or their stockholders of like com.
binations.
"We must construe the sixth para
graph of the decree," said the Chief
Justice, "not as depriving the stock
holders or corporations of the right to
live under the law of the land, but as
compelling obedience to that law.
He said It did not follow, because an
illegal restraint of trade or an attempt
to monopolize or a monopolization re
suited from the combination of corpora
tions in the New Jersey corporation,
that a like restraint or attempt to mo
nopolize or monopolization would nec
essarily arise from agreements between
one or more of the subsidiary corpora
tions after transfer of the stock by the
New Jesey corporation.
"For illustration," said he, "take tne
pipelines. By the effect of the transfer
of the stock, the pipelines would come
under the control of various corpora
tions Instead of being subjected to
uniform control. If various corpora
tions owning the lines determined in
the publlo interests so to combine as to
make a continuous line, such agree
ment or combination would not be re
pugnant to the act, and yet it might
be restrained by the decree.
'As another example, take the Union
Tank Line Company, one of the sub
sidiary corporations, the owners practi
cally of all the tank cars in use by the
combination. If no possibility existed
of agreements for the distribution of
these cars among the subsidiary corpo
rations, the most serious detriment to
the public interest might result,'
CORPORATIONS MUST SUBMIT
Hadley Says Decision Proves They
Are Subservient to Law.
JEFFERSON CITY. Mo., May 15.
Since the greatest combination of
money and power that the world has
ever known has been defeated in Its
contest for existence, all other combina
tions must of necessity submit."
This is the view taken of the Standard
Oil decision by Governor Herbert S.
Hadley, who, as Attorney-General of
Miseolrl, asked and obtained, after a
notable fight, the ouster of the Stand
ard OU Company of Indiana from Mis
souri. "The effect of this decision. Insofar
as the Standard Oil is concerned," he
said, "will depend on how vigorously
the National Government enforces its
decree, but the greatest importance and
value of this decision Is that it estab
lishes for all time and beyond all ques-
STAXDARD OIL KEEPS SILENT
Newsboy Announces Decision on
Steps of 2 6 Broadway.
NEW. TORE, May 15. On the steps of
the Standard Oil building at 26 Broad
way, there stood a newsboy this after
noon crying "Standard Oil loses."
Inside not an officer of the company
would speak. William Rockefeller sel
dom talks and did not break his rule.
John I. Archhold is 111 at his home In
Tarrytown. Mortimer F. Elliott, solicitor-general
for the company, said
that he could have nothing to say un
til he had read the full text of the de
cision. Many brokers' offices kept open late
into the night for London accounts.
When similar previous decisions were
handed down after, the market- closed,
the financial powers were, able to get
together over night on plan for action
In the market the following morning.
TWO KILLED BY WIRE
VANCOUVER, B. C, EXPRESSMAN
MEETS DEATH INSTANTLY.
Stranger, Still Unidentified, Rushes
to His Assistance and Also Is
Electrocuted.
VANCOUVER. B..C, May 15-Two
men were killed Instantly today by an
electric wire at the comer of Robson
and Bldwell streets. Charles TXibrau,
an expressman, was walking around his
wagon when his head came in. contaot
with a wire dangling from a pole, and
he staggered.
The second man, who was passing and
who has not been identified, rushed to
Dubrau's assistance and caught hold of
him by the shoulder.
Both fell to the ground together and
lay quiet. A third man ran to the as
sistance of the two and received a shock
that disabled him, but by this time the
wire had been disengaged from XMi-
brau's head and several persons who
came running from different directions
carried the men to the sidewalk. The
Jjflrst two were dead.
The wire which Dubrau s ehad had
struck, was a messenger cable which
lately had been unused. The upper end
of the wire had come in contact with
the SOOO-volt wire of the lighting circuit.
The lower end dangled within five feet
of the ground. How long it had been
In that nosition no one seems to know.
The unidentified man was well dressed
and about 35 years old.
Women to Beautify Athena.
ATHENA. Or.. May 15. (Special)
The women of this place have taken it
upon themselves to beautify the city
park. They made arrangements for
setting out a large number of plants
and shrubs and then at the suggestion
of a' nursery company postponed the
planting until next Spring. Owing to
the lateness of the season and the un-
seasonableness of the weather the
nurserymen said it would be time and
energy wasted to attempt to do much
this year. For the purpose of raising
a park fund they held a pastry sale
recently and expect to give others
soon.
fco so
NATURES CUBE
FOR BLOOD POISOH
A great many medicines used in treating Contagions Blood Poison are
composed largely of mercury and potash, and are intended to dry up or re
move the hvaiiliating; outward symptoms. But such treatment cannot cure
the disease, and its continued use will often so weaken and disease the stom- -ach
as to make a nervous wreck of the patient. And too, when these min
eral medicines are left off the smoldering poison takes on new life, and soon,
the old symptoms of ulcerated mouth and throat, brown, scaly splotches,
falling hair, sores and ulcers, etc., return with increased virulence. S. S. S.
cures Contagious Blood Poison by purifying the blood and keeping the
stomach and digestive members in perfect condition all the while by its fine
tonic effects. S. S. S. is a purely vegetable remedy, made entirely of roots,
herbs and barks of recognized virtue as blood purifiers. S. S. S. cures on the
principle that not only must the poison be removed from the blood, but also
the circulation must be enriched and vitalized with nourishing powers.
S. S. S.sis known everywhere as the greatest of all blood purifiers and a safe,
certain cure for Contagious Blood Poison. Home treatment Book and medical
advice free. S. S. S. is for sale at drug stores.
THE SWIFT SPECIFIC. CO ATLANTA, GA.