THE MISSOURI OUSTER CASES 



THE famous Missouri Ouster 

 cases against twenty lumber 

 companies under anti-trust pro- 

 ceedings, have been finally set- 

 tled. On July 2nd, the Supreme 

 Court of Missouri denied the applica- 

 tion for a modification of judgment 

 under the decision of December 24, 

 1918, reduced the fine imposed on four 

 of the companies and withheld the 

 ouster issued against all of the com- 

 panies, if they pay the fines imposed, 

 so long as they obey ten conditions out- 

 lined in the decision, and withdraw 

 from direct or indirect membership in 

 the Yellow Pine Manufacturers' Asso- 

 ciation, and all associations of like 

 character. 



The influence of this decision is far- 

 reaching, not only in its effect on the 

 existence and function of lumber trade 

 organizations, but on the rights and 

 privileges of individual companies to 

 cooperate to the mutual benefit of both 

 the producer and consumer. The lum- 

 ber industry, which is now suffering 

 from economic vicissitudes, is likely to 

 be further handicapped by this court 

 decision so lumbermen say. 



Some of the companies concerned 

 are understood to be in honor bound 

 not to carry the case to the United 

 States Supreme Court, and by their 

 agreement to accept the present de- 

 cision there is implied an acknowledg- 

 ment of guilt, which is not in anywise 

 borne out by the actual facts. Lumber- 

 men say the court was not sufficiently 

 cognizant of the conditions in the lum- 

 ber business, to consider fully and 

 fairly the economic situation which 

 prevailed in 1907, at the time the lum- 

 ber output of the- State fell off abruptly, 

 owing to the panic which reached a 

 climax in ( )ctober of that year. The 

 lumbermen acting individually would, 

 no doubt, have saved money if they had 

 shut down their mills completely at the 

 time when the demand for lumber fell 

 off so abruptly ; but since instead of 

 that they preferred to take the broader 



602 



view of producing enough to keep their 

 mills operating and their employees out 

 of the bread line, they consider it an 

 injustice that they are now fined and 

 prevented from organizing for helpful 

 cooperation, through some legal inter- 

 pretation which they declare ignores 

 common sense fundamentals. 



The lumber trade papers are bitter 

 in their denunciation of the decision. 



The Lumber World Review of July 

 10th. says regarding it: 



"It is true that the Supreme Court of the 

 State of Missouri has done what we believe 

 to be an unjust and monstrous thing in this 

 alleged land of liberty by fining the lumber- 

 men of that State nearly four hundred thou- 

 sand dollars and ruling that they will be 

 ousted from the State unless they cancel 

 their membership in the Yellow Pine Manu- 

 facturers' Association." 



The same hard-hitting trade paper 

 says apropos of the alleged lumber 

 trust agitation in general that : 



"There NEVER WAS and NEVER 

 WILL BE and NEVER CAN BE a lumber 

 trust any more than there could be a bread 

 trust or a potato trust or a rain-water trust. 



"The Bureau of Corporations and Con- 

 gress and all the other sections, divisions and 

 bureaus of the United States government 

 might just as well try to dissolve the Bap- 

 tist, Presbyterian, Catholic or Methodist 

 churches, the National Historical Society, 

 the Society of Physical Research and all the 

 fraternal bodies, as to prorogue, dismantle, 

 iMinul and kill the business organizations of 

 the country. They might try their hands at 

 knocking out the Chamber of Commerce of 

 the United States and each business institu- 

 tion in turn, but if they did the whole fabric 

 of government would fall asunder." 



The American Lumberman of July 

 1 Ith connects the decision with the atti- 

 tude of politicians towards business in- 

 terests, by saying : 



"This decision * * goes with pending 

 legislation, with other court decisions and 

 .with a manifested attitude displayed in Con- 

 gress, and exploited by politicians who wish 

 to profit by the arousing of prejudices of a 

 certain class of the voters against all who 

 are apparently successful in business life." 



