oil
state
texas
argued
decided
january
moorfield
storey
perkins
priest
thorndike
johnson
plaintiff
error
allen
batts
robert
vance
davidson
jewel
john
brady
gregory
allen
hart
defendant
error
justice
day
delivered
opinion
case
begun
state
district
travis
county
texas
forfeit
permit
plaintiff
error
oil
company
corporation
state
missouri
conduct
business
state
texas
assess
penalties
violation
laws
state
prosecution
two
laws
state
one
march
proceeding
brought
attorney
general
texas
county
attorney
travis
county
recover
penalties
act
may
day
may
day
march
rate
per
day
act
march
till
april
rate
per
day
cancel
permit
defendant
business
interstate
texas
jury
returned
verdict
defendant
sessed
penalties
act
may
march
days
penalties
assessed
rate
day
period
total
sum
jury
also
found
defendant
act
assessed
penalties
day
april
april
days
rate
per
day
making
total
jury
found
permit
defendant
business
state
texas
canceled
thereupon
rendered
judgment
state
texas
sum
penalties
assessed
ordered
cancelation
defendant
permit
business
state
except
interstate
commerce
business
judgment
affirmed
upon
appeal
civil
appeals
texas
upon
application
texas
refused
grant
writ
error
case
brought
case
submitted
upon
oral
arguments
elaborate
briefs
voluminous
pecord
argued
many
aspects
though
proceeding
error
review
weight
evidence
adduced
state
courts
rulings
upon
admissibility
testimony
determine
effect
statute
limitations
state
jurisdiction
review
proceedings
state
courts
frequent
occasion
declare
general
reviewing
error
limited
specific
instances
denials
federal
rights
whether
pertaining
constitutionality
federal
state
statutes
certain
rights
immunities
privileges
federal
origin
specially
set
state
denied
rulings
judgment
rev
stat
comp
stat
sit
review
finding
facts
made
state
accepts
findings
state
upon
matters
fact
conclusive
confined
review
questions
federal
law
within
jurisdiction
conferred
upon
quinby
boyd
ed
sup
egan
hart
ed
sup
downer
richards
ed
sup
thayer
spratt
ed
sup
shall
therefore
undertake
follow
counsel
consideration
questions
argued
shall
limit
review
questions
federal
nature
deem
properly
made
record
essential
decision
case
epitomizing
texas
statutes
purposes
charge
learned
judge
presided
district
speaking
first
act
stated
follows
purposes
charge
instructed
act
made
unlawful
corporation
transacting
conducting
kind
business
state
enter
become
party
agreement
understanding
corporation
individual
fix
regulate
price
texas
article
manufacture
merchandise
control
limit
texas
trade
article
manufacture
merchandise
instructed
said
statute
also
made
unlawful
corporation
transacting
conducting
kind
business
state
bring
permit
union
combination
capital
property
trade
acts
capital
property
trade
acts
person
corporation
whereby
price
texas
article
manufacture
merchandise
fixed
sought
fixed
regulated
sought
regulated
whereby
price
texas
article
manufacture
merchandise
reasonably
calculated
fixed
regulated
whereby
trade
article
manufacture
merchandise
texas
sought
controlled
limited
reasonably
calculated
controlled
limited
statute
known
law
became
effective
march
since
continued
force
purposes
charge
instructed
statute
defines
trust
combination
capital
skill
acts
two
persons
firms
corporations
associations
persons
either
two
either
following
purposes
viz
create
may
tend
create
carry
restrictions
trade
commerce
texas
create
carry
restrictions
free
pursuit
texas
business
authorized
permitted
laws
state
fix
maintain
increase
price
merchandise
texas
prevent
lessen
competition
texas
sale
merchandise
abstain
engaging
business
sale
merchandise
texas
portion
thereof
statute
defines
monopoly
combination
consolidation
two
corporations
effected
following
methods
viz
direction
affairs
two
corporations
manner
brought
management
control
purpose
producing
common
management
control
tends
create
trust
defined
corporation
acquires
shares
certificates
stock
franchise
rights
physical
properties
part
thereof
corporation
purpose
preventing
lessening
effect
acquisition
tends
affect
lessen
competition
whether
acquisition
accomplished
directly
instrumentality
trustees
otherwise
oil
products
petroleum
goods
wares
merchandise
character
defendant
agents
may
purchased
acquired
manner
outside
state
texas
caused
transported
agents
others
within
state
subjects
interstate
commerce
enter
state
remain
commodities
removed
original
tanks
vessels
packages
imported
state
become
mixed
common
mass
property
similar
character
state
laws
texas
reference
agreements
pools
arrangements
character
concerning
subjects
interstate
commerce
agreement
pool
arrangement
defendant
may
entered
reference
sale
subject
interstate
commerce
considered
violating
law
texas
neither
oil
purchased
defendant
corsicana
refinery
elsewhere
texas
merchandise
purchased
defendant
points
texas
oil
merchandise
purchased
defendant
points
outside
state
transported
state
removed
original
packages
vessels
brought
state
mingled
property
similar
character
state
subject
interstate
commerce
contrary
subject
local
commerce
agreement
pool
arrangement
entered
defendant
reference
property
sale
thereof
sale
unlawful
violation
laws
state
penalties
denounced
act
less
day
defendant
might
found
violated
law
act
penalty
fixed
day
forfeiture
right
business
within
state
texas
declared
complaint
case
voluminous
averments
contain
history
conspiracy
oil
company
number
persons
composing
standard
oil
company
beginning
january
purpose
monopolizing
controlling
business
refining
transporting
selling
petroleum
similar
products
throughout
state
texas
charges
oil
company
incorporated
predecessor
defendant
company
party
conspiracy
purpose
carrying
entered
contracts
corporations
individuals
engaged
business
selling
petroleum
similar
products
within
state
suppressed
competition
therein
charges
oil
company
entered
agreement
standard
oil
company
new
sey
purpose
monopolizing
trade
petroleum
purpose
carrying
certain
contracts
conspiracies
entered
purposes
aforesaid
permitted
standard
oil
company
acquire
majority
shares
stock
company
original
oil
company
dissolved
new
company
present
defendant
organized
may
assumed
contracts
agreements
predecessor
averred
dissolving
old
company
forming
new
company
defendant
case
pursuance
conspiracy
purpose
continuing
monopoly
control
acquired
old
company
purpose
rendering
ineffective
judgments
state
ed
sup
wherein
right
company
business
texas
forfeited
averred
new
corporation
name
old
one
amount
stock
distributed
holders
stock
new
corporation
proportion
among
shareholders
old
corporation
charged
major
part
capital
stock
although
fact
owned
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
stood
time
name
pierce
fact
owned
standard
oil
company
conduct
business
new
corporation
changed
controlled
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
manner
old
company
old
contract
whereby
division
territory
limitation
operations
pierce
oil
company
state
texas
territory
maintained
enforced
concerns
acquired
carrying
scheme
charged
said
companies
put
business
used
controlling
monopolizing
trade
business
aforesaid
defendant
new
corporation
party
ments
participated
engaged
carrying
things
charged
alleged
effect
control
defendant
large
number
companies
corporation
persons
acquiescence
consent
defendant
competition
texas
companies
destroyed
certain
sections
parts
assigned
various
companies
defendant
permitted
business
texas
knowledge
consent
upon
instance
demands
companies
excluded
business
state
texas
agreement
defendant
obliged
secure
oil
sold
certain
named
refiners
prices
determined
standard
oil
company
interested
effect
monopolizing
controlling
business
oil
production
petroleum
texas
fixing
prices
products
state
plaintiff
summarizes
unlawful
results
accomplished
follows
plaintiff
error
dominated
controlled
business
dictated
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
large
number
individuals
corporations
business
sale
petroleum
products
excluded
business
state
competition
lessened
price
oil
maintained
exorbitant
figure
per
cent
higher
oil
sold
territory
claimed
plaintiff
error
competition
suppressed
business
destroyed
state
unconscionable
unfair
means
substantially
complete
monopoly
petroleum
products
established
plaintiff
error
sold
period
ten
years
past
least
per
cent
petroleum
products
sold
defendant
answered
filed
large
number
special
pleas
exceptions
taking
issue
upon
charges
made
petition
alleging
unconstitutionality
acts
alleging
petition
state
texas
granted
denied
equal
protection
laws
subjected
ex
post
facto
laws
deprived
property
without
due
process
law
obligations
contracts
impaired
contrary
provisions
constitution
trial
may
term
district
travis
county
verdict
rendered
favor
state
penalties
assessed
judgment
rendered
herein
stated
civil
appeals
state
texas
found
facts
found
verdict
trial
concluding
opinion
upon
question
fact
said
appellant
motion
new
trial
presentation
case
verdict
jury
challenged
contention
testimony
fails
show
appellant
violated
laws
state
evidence
voluminous
necessary
set
epitomized
opinion
sufficient
think
show
date
permit
business
state
may
appellant
party
agreement
understanding
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
one
object
create
monopoly
control
price
petroleum
oil
prevent
competition
sale
large
specified
territory
including
state
texas
large
extent
object
accomplished
far
agreement
related
state
appellant
acting
agents
performed
within
state
performance
within
limits
state
constitutes
violations
texas
laws
renders
appellant
amenable
laws
although
agreement
standard
oil
company
may
made
state
large
extent
case
rests
upon
circumstantial
evidence
say
jury
warranted
conclusions
drawn
hence
hold
verdict
ported
testimony
error
committed
overruling
motion
new
trial
left
case
jury
upon
charge
permitted
find
whether
defendant
company
acting
duly
authorized
agents
entered
become
party
agreement
understanding
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
june
fix
regulate
price
oil
texas
whether
company
remained
continued
party
agreement
carried
texas
dates
subsequent
june
prior
march
whether
oil
reference
agreement
made
carried
subject
local
distinguished
interstate
commerce
charged
within
time
stated
defendant
brought
permitted
combination
union
capital
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
whereby
price
oil
texas
found
controlled
limited
fixed
regulated
whereby
price
reasonably
calculated
fixed
regulated
whereby
trade
oil
texas
sought
controlled
limited
might
return
verdict
state
charged
find
defendant
duly
authorized
agents
entered
combination
capital
capital
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
purpose
creating
texas
tended
create
texas
carry
texas
restrictions
free
pursuit
selling
oil
effect
increasing
price
oil
texas
prevent
lessen
competition
selling
said
state
defendant
remained
party
acted
combination
march
thereafter
prior
april
might
return
verdict
guilty
jury
instructed
found
evidence
direction
affairs
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
defendant
company
management
control
march
prior
april
placed
common
management
control
respectively
authorized
officers
management
control
created
tended
create
carry
restrictions
sale
oil
texas
stated
fix
maintain
increase
prices
oil
said
state
prevent
lessen
competition
sale
oil
might
return
verdict
state
jury
found
issues
submitted
defendant
civil
appeals
affirmed
finding
fact
must
accept
established
purposes
proceeding
error
numerous
exceptions
taken
charge
trial
subjects
assignments
error
state
concerned
relate
federal
questions
involved
proceeding
eleventh
paragraph
charge
instructed
jury
follows
find
preponderance
evidence
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
march
date
subsequent
thereto
prior
april
acquired
majority
capital
stock
defendant
corporation
thereby
effected
combination
said
two
corporations
find
preponderance
evidence
said
stock
acquired
combination
effected
purpose
intention
part
managing
officers
directors
said
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
preventing
lessening
competition
sale
texas
character
kind
oil
mentioned
effect
said
combination
tended
affect
lessen
competition
sale
texas
said
oil
return
verdict
state
say
verdict
jury
find
state
issues
submitted
consideration
paragraph
eleven
charge
connection
instructed
defendant
entered
monopoly
character
mentioned
paragraph
charge
day
march
april
remained
party
monopoly
days
constituted
separate
violation
laws
texas
judges
civil
appeals
differed
views
correctnee
charge
learned
justice
wrote
opinion
holding
view
calculated
mislead
jury
belief
might
convict
upon
issue
regardless
whether
defendant
knowledge
participated
aided
standard
oil
company
acquiring
stock
defendant
purposes
stated
agreed
wrong
part
charge
afforded
ground
reversal
jury
found
appellant
violated
provisions
act
assessed
one
penalty
day
violation
therefore
judgment
error
harmless
thus
deciding
civil
appeals
determine
federal
question
necessarily
decide
one
adversely
plaintiff
error
controlling
character
appears
upon
record
verdict
judgment
stand
upon
grounds
free
objection
far
federal
rights
concerned
much
argument
plaintiff
error
predicated
upon
contention
acquiring
stock
company
standard
oil
company
making
agreement
charged
shown
acts
done
texas
contended
acquiring
stock
agreement
acts
beyond
jurisdiction
state
inspection
record
discloses
charged
agreement
made
defendant
outside
state
texas
made
basis
forfeiting
permit
business
state
unless
agreement
executed
attempted
executed
state
duly
authorized
agents
defendant
findings
quoted
evidence
state
found
defendant
since
may
party
agreement
standard
oil
company
new
jersey
create
monopoly
control
prices
prevent
competition
texas
large
extent
object
accomplished
findings
facts
conclusive
upon
us
show
conviction
acts
transactions
committed
carried
within
state
texas
argument
effect
rulings
admission
testimony
upon
questions
general
law
deprived
defendant
property
rights
without
due
process
law
requires
us
notice
limitations
upon
authority
dealing
legislative
acts
proceedings
enforce
state
courts
state
legislatures
right
deal
matter
prevent
unlawful
combinations
prevent
competition
restraint
trade
prohibit
punish
monopolies
open
question
national
cotton
oil
texas
ed
sup
smiley
kansas
ed
sup
power
pass
laws
character
course
state
may
provide
proceedings
enforce
state
keeping
within
constitutional
limitations
may
provide
method
procedure
determine
methods
means
laws
may
made
effectual
limit
full
control
state
proceedings
courts
civil
criminal
cases
subject
qualification
procedure
must
work
denial
fundamental
rights
conflict
specific
applicable
provisions
federal
constitution
west
louisiana
ed
sup
see
davis
texas
ed
sup
brown
new
jersey
ed
sup
allen
georgia
ed
sup
converse
ed
sup
twining
new
jersey
ed
sup
decided
term
subject
fully
discussed
previous
cases
cited
contended
acts
case
given
retroactive
effect
violation
federal
constitution
art
argument
predicated
largely
upon
contention
conviction
case
old
agreement
former
oil
company
made
long
passage
present
statute
time
legal
creation
defendant
company
view
facts
found
state
already
referred
ground
conviction
making
old
agreement
division
territory
suppression
competition
old
company
existence
new
company
found
carried
old
agreement
made
party
thereto
continuing
old
arrangement
passage
law
brought
within
terms
similar
contention
said
missouri
freight
asso
ed
sup
said
grant
injunction
prayed
case
give
statute
retroactive
effect
contract
time
entered
prohibited
declared
illegal
statute
passed
enjoin
act
legal
time
done
improper
give
law
retroactive
effect
agreement
question
continuing
one
parties
adopt
certain
machinery
agree
certain
methods
purpose
establishing
maintaining
future
reasonable
rates
transportation
assuming
action
legal
time
agreement
first
entered
continuation
agreement
declared
illegal
becomes
violation
act
statute
prohibits
continuing
entering
agreement
future
agreement
continued
becomes
violation
act
insisted
acts
question
vague
indefinite
uncertain
deprive
constitutionality
punish
forfeiture
right
business
imposition
penalties
provisions
act
advise
citizen
corporation
prosecuted
nature
character
acts
constituting
violation
law
objections
found
words
act
denouncing
contracts
arrangements
calculated
fix
regulate
price
commodities
etc
act
acts
prohibited
accomplish
prohibited
results
insisted
laws
indefinite
one
tell
acts
embraced
within
provisions
support
contention
argued
laws
nature
explicit
persons
subject
penalties
may
know
duty
avoid
reference
made
decisions
held
criminal
statutes
definite
enable
included
terms
know
advance
whether
act
criminal
among
others
tozer
inters
com
fed
cited
opinion
justice
brewer
judge
circuit
held
criminality
act
depend
upon
whether
jury
may
think
reasonable
unreasonable
effect
chicago
dey
inters
com
fed
also
decided
judge
brewer
circuit
also
case
louisville
com
relied
upon
railroad
indicted
charging
reasonable
rate
held
law
unconstitutional
act
rests
jury
say
whether
rate
reasonable
makes
guilt
depend
upon
standards
fixed
law
upon
jury
might
think
reasonableness
rate
controversy
texas
statutes
question
give
broad
power
jury
determine
criminal
character
act
accordance
belief
whether
reasonable
unreasonable
statutes
condemned
cases
cited
take
act
denounces
acts
bring
prohibited
results
uncommon
criminal
law
punish
completed
act
also
acts
attempt
bring
prohibited
result
knight
ed
sup
said
thorities
agree
order
vitiate
contract
combination
essential
result
complete
monopoly
sufficient
really
tends
end
deprive
public
advantages
flow
free
competition
language
quoted
approval
addyston
pipe
steel
ed
sup
northern
securities
ed
sup
sherman
act
directly
condemned
conspiracies
combinations
restraint
trade
monopolizing
attempting
monopolize
said
page
vitiate
combination
act
congress
condemns
need
shown
combination
fact
results
result
total
suppression
trade
complete
monopoly
essential
show
necessary
operation
tends
restrain
interstate
international
trade
commerce
tends
create
monopoly
trade
commerce
deprive
public
advantages
flow
free
competition
phrase
calculated
include
less
acts
fairly
considered
tend
accomplish
prohibited
thing
make
highly
probable
given
result
accomplished
speaking
sherman
act
said
swift
ed
sup
statute
gives
proceeding
combinations
restraint
commerce
among
attempts
monopolize
intent
almost
essential
combination
essential
attempt
acts
sufficient
produce
result
law
seeks
prevent
instance
monopoly
require
acts
addition
mere
forces
nature
bring
result
pass
intent
bring
pass
necessary
order
produce
dangerous
probability
happen
com
peaslee
mass
intent
consequent
dangerous
probability
exist
statute
like
many
others
like
common
law
cases
directs
dangerous
probability
well
completed
result
true
decisions
quoted
civil
cases
involving
contracts
arrangements
held
invalid
attacked
proceedings
equity
involve
penalties
imposed
case
consideration
remembered
dealing
act
legislature
sustained
courts
state
reference
validity
view
prohibitions
federal
constitution
deprivation
state
action
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
case
defendant
trial
justice
duly
established
laws
state
question
liability
submitted
jury
judgment
reviewed
appellate
correctness
findings
fact
rulings
law
lower
affirmed
prepared
say
deprivation
due
process
law
statute
permitted
charged
might
conviction
acts
accomplished
prohibited
result
also
tend
reasonably
calculated
bring
things
forbidden
contended
fines
imposed
excessive
constitute
taking
defendant
property
without
due
process
law
contended
connection
prohibition
amendment
federal
constitution
excessive
fines
operates
control
legislation
fixing
punishment
crime
penalties
unlawful
acts
laws
within
police
power
state
interfere
legislation
judicial
action
enforcing
fines
imposed
grossly
excessive
amount
deprivation
property
without
due
process
law
coffey
harlan
county
ed
sup
business
carried
defendant
corporation
texas
extensive
highly
profitable
record
discloses
property
defendant
amounted
forty
millions
dollars
testified
president
dividends
high
per
cent
per
annum
theory
state
sustained
verdict
judgment
former
course
business
continued
notwithstanding
judgment
ouster
former
case
within
bounds
statute
penalties
left
discretion
jury
trying
case
penalties
imposed
large
within
terms
statute
act
jury
imposed
penalty
rate
day
act
rate
per
day
assuming
purpose
defendant
guilty
violation
laws
period
years
transacting
business
upon
large
scale
shown
case
prepared
say
confirmation
verdict
judgment
courts
state
want
due
process
law
penalties
assessed
remembering
frequent
occasion
say
province
case
limited
examination
objections
arising
federal
constitution
unable
find
record
ground
reversing
judgment
state
affirmed