Page images
PDF
EPUB

61. United States v. Calvin N. Payne et al. Indictment re

turned August 29, 1912, in the N. D. of Texas, charging defendants with engaging in a conspiracy in restraint of interstate and foreign trade and commerce in oils and

oil products. Nolle prosequi entered February 25, 1913. 62. United States v. The Master Horseshoers' National Pro

tective Association of America and others. Petition filed December 12, 1912, in the E. D. of Michigan, charging defendants with engaging in a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade and commerce in drilled horseshoes, adjustable calks, and rubber hoof pads. Demurrers overruled April 4, 1914. The case was not contested and decrees granting the relief asked were entered

in March and April, 1914, and January, 1916. 63. United States v. Philadelphia Jobbing Confectioners' Association et al. Petition filed December 13, 1912, in the E. D. of Pennsylvania, charging defendants with unlawfully interfering with interstate commerce in candies and confections. Consent decree entered February

17, 1913. 64. United States v. Elgin Board of Trade et al. Petition filed December 14, 1912, in the N. D. of Illinois, charging defendants with combining and conspiring in the interest of a number of large centralizing concerns to restrain interstate commerce in butter and butter fat, and arbitrarily fixing the price thereof to obtain throughout the United States. A decree granting the relief sought was entered without contest on April

27, 1914. 65. United States v. Charles S. Mellen, Edson J. Chamberlain,

and Alfred W. Smithers. Indictment returned December 23, 1912, in the S. D. of New York, charging a combination and conspiracy to restrain interstate commerce by preventing the construction of subsidiary lines of the Central Vermont Railway Company (itself a subsidiary of the Grand Trunk Railway Company) from

Palmer, Mass., to Providence, R. I.; from White River
Junction, Vermont, to Boston; and from Boston to
Blackstone, connecting there with the Palmer-Provi-

dence line. Pending. 66.

United States v. Kellogg Toasted Corn Flake Company

et al. Petition filed December 26, 1912, in the E. D. of Michigan, alleging that the business policy of the defendant company in fixing and enforcing resale prices on Kellogg's Toasted Corn Flakes is unlawful and tends to restrain and monopolize interstate commerce in said product. In a decision handed down on April 14, 1915, the circuit judges for the Sixth Circuit held this practice to be unlawful. Subsequently the Kellogg Company announced that it would not further contest the case and a final decree was entered on September 20,

1915. 67. United States v. Page et al. Indictment returned Febru

ary 5, 1913, at Portland, D. of Oregon, charging 15 individuals, through the medium of the Produce Merchants' Exchange, of Portland, with unlawfully controlling the purchase, distribution, and sale of approximately 90 per cent of the produce, fruit, and vegetables shipped into the State of Oregon. The defendants entered pleas of guilty on February 21, 1913, and

fines aggregating $8,450 were imposed and collected. 68. United States. V. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Company et

al. Petition filed February 7, 1913, in the District Court, E. D. of Michigan, alleging the unlawful control by defendant of the interstate trade and commerce in shoe and boot lasts, both patented and unpatented. Consent decree was entered at Detroit, Michigan, on

February 7, 1913. 69. United States v. United Shoe Machinery Company of

New Jersey et al. Petition filed February 8, 1913,
the District Court at Trenton, New Jersey, seeking to
have annulled an alleged unlawful contract involving
“inseam trimming machines.” Collateral to Case No.

in

40 above. The Supreme Court having decided the Massachusetts case against the United Shoe Machinery Company (No. 40 supra) adversely to the Government,

the petition in this case was dismissed in April, 1919. 70. United States v. The Southern Wholesale Grocers' Asso

ciation et al. Petition for rule to show cause why an attachment for a criminal contempt of court for alleged violation of the terms of a decree, entered October 17, 1911 (see No. 10, page 74), should not issue was filed in the District Court at Birmingham, N. D. of Alabama, on February 10, 1913. The association and three individual members were adjudged guilty of contempt of court, and on July 29, 1913, fines aggre

gating $5,500 were imposed. 71. United States v. Board of Trade of the City of Chicago et al.

Petition filed February 11, 1913, in the District Court, N. D. of Illinois, attacking rule 33 of the Chicago Board of Trade, by virtue of which it is alleged the price of all corn, oats, wheat, and rye arriving in Chicago at times when the board of trade is not in session is arbitrarily determined. A motion to strike out certain portions of defendants' answer was granted. The case was decided in favor of the Government, and a final decree was entered on December 28, 1915. An appeal to the Supreme Court prosecuted by the defendants was in March, 1918, decided adversely to the

Government. 72. United States v. The Cleveland Stone Company et al.

Petition filed February 12, 1913, in the District Court, N. D. of Ohio, charging defendants with establishing and maintaining a practical monopoly of the stone busi

A final decree granting the relief sought by the Government was entered without contest on February

11, 1916. 73. United States v. The Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company and The Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Coal Company. Petition filed February 13,

ness.

1913, in the District Court at Trenton, New Jersey, charging defendants with transporting coal in which it had an interest in violation of the Commodities Clause of the Interstate Commerce Act, and with entering into an unlawful, contract whereby the Coal Company acquired a monopoly of the sale of anthracite coal produced along the line of the Railroad Company, in violation of the Antitrust Act. Expediting certificate filed and case set for hearing on January 27, 1914.

The district court dismissed the petition and the case was appealed. In a decision handed down on June 21, 1915, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the lower court, holding that the unity of management existing between the railroad and coal company brought the matter within the condemnation of the commodities clause. It also held the contract between those companies to be in violation of the Antitrust Act.

A decree was entered by the district court on August 11, 1915, enjoining the railroad from further transporting in interstate commerce coal mined or purchased by it and purporting to have been sold to the coal company under the above-mentioned contract; and enjoining both the railroad and the coal company from further carry

ing out or enforcing the provisions of that contract. 74. United States v. The McCaskey Register Company et al.

Petition filed February 20, 1913, in the District Court, N. D. of Ohio, charging defendants with conspiring to restrain and monopolize the manufacture and sale of account registers and appliances. Upon re-investigation the case was dismissed without prejudice on January 7,

1915. 75. United States v. International Brotherhood of Electrical

Workers, Local Unions Nos. 9 and 134, et al. Petition filed February 24, 1913, in the District Court, N. D. of Illinois, seeking to enjoin defendants from interfering with the interstate business of the Postal TelegraphCable Company. A temporary injunction was granted forthwith, and was made permanent by a final decree entered on February 27, 1914.

76.

United States v. Corn Products Refining Company et al. Petition filed March 1, 1913, in the District Court, S. D. of New York, charging defendants with monopolizing and restraining interstate trade and.commerce in corn products, and praying for the dissolution of the combination. The case was argued in March, 1916, and a decision favorable to the Government and ordering the dissolution of the combination was handed down on June 24, 1916. From this decision the defendants took an appeal to the Supreme Court, which they subsequently withdrew, however, and submitted to the decree entered by the District Court. Decree modified

with consent of Government on October 18, 1921. 77. United States v. The American Thread Company et al.

Petition filed March 3, 1913, in the District Court at Trenton, New Jersey, charging defendants with monopolizing the thread industry. The defendants did not contest this case and on June 2, 1914, a decree was entered dissolving the combination and enjoining the use of certain unfair trade practices against independent

manufactures. 78. United States v. The Burroughs Adding Machine Company et al. Petition filed March 3, 1913, in the District Court, E. D. of Michigan, alleging that defendants were engaged in a conspiracy to monopolize interstate trade and commerce in adding machines. A consent

decree was entered at Detroit on March 3, 1913. 79. United States v. American Coal Products Company et al.

Petition filed March 3, 1913, in the District Court, S. D. of New York, charging defendants with monopolizing the supply of coal tar and restraining the trade of competitors in the purchase of coal tar and in the manufacture and sale of tarred roofing felts, coal-tar pitch, and other coal-tar products. A consent decree was entered on March 4, 1913.

« PreviousContinue »