Page images
PDF
EPUB

state commerce. A temporary injunction was issued on July 2, 1894, for violation of which contempt proceedings were instituted. Original petition dismissed on

July 28, 1899, at the instance of the Government. 3a. United States v. Debs et al. Proceedings in contempt in

stituted in the Circuit Court, N. D. of Illinois, December 14, 1894, to punish Debs and others for disobeying an injunction restraining them from interfering with interstate commerce and with obstructing the mails. De

fendants found guilty and punished. 3b. In re Debs, petitioner. Application to United States Su

preme Court July 2, 1894, for a writ of habeas corpus to secure a discharge from imprisonment for disobeying an injunction of the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illinois, restraining Debs and others from conspiring to interfere with interstate commerce. Peti

tion for the writ denied. 4. United States v. Cassidy. Indictment returned in July,

1894, in the District Court, N. D. of California, charging defendants with conspiring to obstruct the mails of the United States (sec. 5440, R. S.) and combining and conspiring to restrain the interstate and foreign trade and commerce of the United States. The prosecution grew out of the great Pullman strike in California in June and July, 1894, which was mainly supported and carried on through the organization known as the "American Railway Union.” The trial resulted in a disagreement of the jury on April 6, 1895, and a

nolle prosequi was entered on July 1, 1895. 5. United States v. Moore. Indictment returned November

4, 1895, against the members of an association of coal dealers in Salt Lake City for entering into a conspiracy, while Utah was a Territory, to regulate the price of coal. Moore was tried and convicted in the District Court of Utah. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of conviction on the ground that upon the admission of Utah as a State it was no longer a "Territory'

within the meaning of the antitrust act, and the combination not being in restraint of interstate commerce the court had no jurisdiction of the offense.

6.

United States v. Joint Traffic Association. Petition filed

January 8, 1896, in the Circuit Court, S. D. of New York, against a combination of thirty-one railroad companies organized for the alleged purpose of suppressing competition in fixing rates, etc. The Circuit Court dismissed the petition, and its action was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. These judgments were reversed by the Supreme Court, and on March 3, 1899, a decree was entered enjoining the defendants from observing the agreement or "articles of organization" entered into.

7.

United States v. Addyston Pipe and Steel Company. Peti

tion filed December 10, 1896, in the Circuit Court, E. D. of Tennessee, to enjoin the operations of a combination of manufacturers of cast-iron pipe, by which it was attempted to control prices. The petition was dismissed by the Circuit Court. The Court of Appeals reversed the decree of the Circuit Court and remanded the case with instructions to enter a decree for the Government. On appeal to the Supreme Court the action of the Circuit Court of Appeals was affirmed, and a decree dissolving the combination was entered on June 6, 1898.

8.

United States v. Hopkins et al. Petition filed December 31,

1896, in the Circuit Court, District of Kansas, to restrain
the operations of the “Kansas City Live Stock Ex-
change,” organized to control shipments of live stock.
· An injunction was granted and an appeal was taken to
the Circuit Court of Appeals, from whence it was re-
moved to the Supreme Court of the United States. That
court reversed the decree of the Circuit Court and re-
manded the case with instructions to dismiss the petition.
A decree of dismissal was entered on May 29, 1899.

President McKinley's Administration-March 4, 1897-September 14, 1901. (JOSEPH MCKENNA, Attorney General, March 5, 1897, to June 25, 1898; John W. GRIGGS, Attorney General, June 25, 1898, to March 29, 1901; PHILANDER C. KNOX, Attorney General, April 5, 1901, to September 14, 1901.) 1. United States v. Anderson. Petition filed June 7, 1897, in

the Circuit Court, W. D. of Missouri, to restrain the operations of “The Traders' Live Stock Exchange,” of Kansas City, an association formed for the purpose of buying cattle on the market. A temporary injunction was granted and the case was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. From there it was certified to the Supreme Court of the United States for instructions. The Supreme Court reversed the decree of the Circuit Court and remanded the case with directions to dismiss the petition. Decree of dismissal

entered December 27, 1898. 2. United States v. Coal Dealers' Association. Petition filed

December 16, 1897, in the Circuit Court, N. D. of California, to restrain the operations of an alleged combination of coal dealers to maintain prices fixed by agreement. A temporary injunction was granted, from which no appeal was taken, and on May 2, 1899, a final decree was ordered granting the relief prayed for.

3

United States v. Chesapeake and Ohio Fuel Company et al.

Petition filed May 8, 1899, in the Circuit Court, S. D. of Ohio, to annul a contract and dissolve a combination between producers and shippers of coal in Ohio and West Virginia. A decree declaring the contract to be illegal and ordering the dissolution of the combination was entered on November 22, 1900.

(60)

President Roosevelt's Administration-September 14, 1901-March 4, 1909. [PHILANDER C. Knox, Attorney General, September 14, 1901, to June 30, 1904; WILLIAM H.

MOODY, Attorney General, July 1, 1904, to December 16, 1906; CHARLES J. BONAPARTE, Attorney General, December 17, 1906, to March 4, 1909.)

United States v. Northern Securities Co. et al. Petition filed

March 10, 1902, in the Circuit Court, District of Minnesota, to enjoin the defendant, the Northern Securities Company, from acquiring, holding, or voting the shares of the capital stock of two competing railway companies. The Circuit Court on April 9, 1903, entered a decree in favor of the Government, and this decree was affirmed by the Supreme Court on March 14, 1904.

2.

United States v. Swift & Co. et al. Petition filed May 10,

1902, in the Circuit Court, N. D. of Illinois, to restrain the defendants, who were engaged in the buying of live stock and the selling of dressed meats, from carrying out an alleged conspiracy entered into between themselves and the various railway companies to suppress competition and to obtain a monopoly. Demurrers to the petition were overruled on February 18, 1903, and a preliminary injunction was granted. The defendants having failed to answer, the court entered a final decree on May 26, 1903. On appeal by the defendants this decree was

affirmed by the Supreme Court. 3. United States v. The Federal Salt Company et al. Peti.

tion filed October 15, 1902, in the Circuit Court, N. D. of California, to restrain the defendants from combining and conspiring to suppress competition in the manufacture and sale of salt in the Western States. A temporary restraining order was issued forthwith, and on November 10, 1902, the court granted an injunction pendente lite, thus in effect making the restraining order perpetual.

(61)

4. United States v. The Federal Salt Company. Indictment

returned February 28, 1903, at San Francisco, N. D. of California, against the so-called Salt Trust. On May 12, 1903, a plea of guilty was entered and a fine of

$1,000 was imposed and collected. 5. United States v. Baker & Holmes Company et al. Petition filed September 12, 1903, in the Circuit Court, S. D. of Florida, for the purpose of dissolving a combination of wholesale grocers.

Decree of dismissal entered November 1, 1907. : 6. United States v. General Paper Co. et al. Petition filed

December 27, 1904, in the Circuit Court, D. of Minnesota, against the General Paper Company and twentythree other corporations engaged in the manufacture and sale of paper, alleging a combination and conspiracy to restrain trade and commerce. On May 11, 1906, the court ordered judgment in favor of the Government, and on June 16, 1906, a decree was entered dissolving the combination and granting all relief prayed for in the

petition. 7. United States v. Armour & Co. et al. Indictment returned

July 1, 1905, at Chicago, N. D. of Illinois, against the so-called Beef Trust. Many preliminary objections were urged and all were disposed of in favor of the Government, except certain special pleas of immunity, based upon the fact that the information on which the defendants were indicted had been given by them to the Department of Commerce and Labor. On March 29, 1906, the court sustained the pleas so far as the individual defendants were concerned and overruled them with respect to the corporations. Nolle prosequi

entered February 5, 1913. 8. United States v. MacAndrews & Forbes Company et al.

Indictment returned June 18, 1906, in the S. D. of New York charging a combination and conspiracy to regulate the interstate trade and sale in licorice paste.

« PreviousContinue »