Brief for the United States (1914)

Record Details:

Title:
Brief for the United States
Date:
1914
Publisher:
Washington, D.C. : United States. Government Printing Office. Office of the Public Printer
Volume:
Brief for the United States
Leaf #:
000326
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Media History Digital Library
Sponsor:
{"Media History Digital Library","Richard Koszarski",Domitor}
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
Date Added:
June 06, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

314 PART XVT. The new problems Avhich had to be decided in the Tobacco case, all of which were resolved in favor of the enforcement of the statute, he stated as follows : (175) If the antitrust act is applicable to the entire situation here presented and is adequate to afford complete relief for the evils which the United States insists that situation presents it can only be because that law will be given a more comprehensive application than has been affixed to it in any previous decision. This will be the case because the undisj^uted facts as we have stated them involve questions as to the operation of the antitrust act not hitherto presented in any case. Thus, even if the ownership of stock by the American Tobacco Co. in the accessory and subsidiary companies and the ownership of stock in any of those companies among themselves were held, as was decided in United States v. Standard Oil Co., to be a violation of the act, and all relations resulting from such stock ownership were therefore set aside, the question would yet remain whether tlu* principal defendant, tlie American Tobacco Co., and the five accessory defendants, even when divested of their stock ownership in other corporations, by virtue of the power which they would continue to possess, even although thus stripped, would amount to a violation of botli the first and second sections of tlie act. Again, if it \v(M*e held tliat the corporations,