Statement of the Case. the employment of such company unless it will agree to enter such association, are equally within the scope of the remedy by injunction sought to prevent injury to the complainants through the execution of the objects of the conspiracy entered into by their codefendants. 7. Where some of a large number of defendants to a bill in equity demurred to the bill, and from a decree dismissing it the complainant appealed, and other of the defendants entered their appearance in this court [163] and were heard in support of the decree, this court, in reversing the decree, awarded costs against all of the defendants appearing in this court. No. 1474. Submitted February 21, 1905. Decided March 7, 1905. HEARING on an appeal by the complainants from a decree of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia dismissing a bill in equity for an injunction. Reversed. The COURT in the opinion stated the case as follows: This is an appeal from a decree sustaining a demurrer to and dismissing a bill for injunction. The bill was filed July 21, 1904, by James C. Leonard and Samuel G. Stewart, retail liquor dealers in the District of Columbia, on their own behalf and on behalf of others similarly engaged who may wish to intervene. The defendants are the Abner-Drury Company, a corporation organized under the laws of West Virginia; the National Capital Brewing Company, a corporation of Virginia; the Arlington Brewing Company, a corporation of Virginia; the Washington Brewery Company, a corporation of New York; the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, a corporation of Virginia; the managers of said corporations, respectively, and Louis S. Crown, Michael Cockery, and Timothy Healy. It is averred that all of said corporations, save the Arlington company, have their breweries and general offices in District of Columbia; that the Arlington company brews its beer in the State of Virginia, but maintains an office and agency for the sale and distribution of its product in the District of Columbia. Defendants Crown and Cockery, residents of the District, are charged as members and officers of an unincorporated association known as Local No. 63 of the International Brotherhood of Stationary Firemen; and Healy, a non-resident, as president of said International Brotherhood. Statement of the Case. It is averred that the five brewing companies are engaged in manufacturing or brewing malt liquors, and dispose of the bulk of their product, which amounts annually to about two hundred [164] and seventy thousand barrels, in the District of Columbia; and that the retail dealers thereof are dependent upon them for the bulk of their stock in trade; that the said brewing companies, excepting the Heurich company, have confederated and conspired together in a brewers' association, or under a name of similar import, in order to prevent competition in the manufacture and sale of brewed or malt liquors, to control the disposition of the same to the retail liquor dealers, and to prevent competition in the price of the same; that by the terms of the confederation and agreement aforesaid no one of said brewing companies shall sell its product at a price to be fixed by itself, nor below an arbitrary price to be fixed by the associators; and, further, the business of selling beer is to be allotted among them, and no one is to sell to the customers allotted to another; that for more than a year a certain grade of "light" beer has been sold to retail dealers at $4 per barrel, with a discount of 10 per cent for cash, making $3.60 per barrel; that prior to said time the price for said beer had been $6, with a discount of 5 per cent for cash, making $5.70 per barrel; that the reduction had been caused by the Heurich company, which had never entered into any agreement with other brewers, and has until this date refused to do so, and that by reason of the reduction in price by the Heurich company the other companies were compelled to reduce the price of their beer to the same figure in order to meet the competition of the Heurich company; that in order to raise the price of beer to that of $6 per barrel the four companies aforesaid entered into a conspiracy to suppress the competition of the Heurich company, and to effectuate the same conspired together to compel the Heurich company to join the association aforesaid, and to abide by and observe the prices fixed thereby, as well as the distribution or allotment to be made among consumers and customers; that the Heurich company in the manufacture of beer is compelled to employ firemen who are members of said Local No. 63 of the International Brother Statement of the Case. hood of Stationary Firemen; that in order to aid in the accomplishment of the purposes of the conspiracy the said four companies agreed with Crown and Healy to induce the firemen employed by the [165] Heurich company to break their contract of employment, unless the latter would agree to enter said association, submit to its regulations raising the price of beer and allotting a division of customers; that in pursuit of the objects of the said conspiracy the said defendants composing the Brewers' Association procured the said defendant Crown to address a communication to the Heurich company notifying it that its contract with its firemen would be terminated on July 1, and that the firemen would not be permitted to work for it unless it joined the said association and submitted to its rules and exactions; that further, to effect the object aforesaid, said defendants composing said association caused the defendant Healy, in his character as president of the brotherhood aforesaid, to seek a conference with the defendant Heurich company, ostensibly to adjust a contract between said defendant and its firemen for the ensuing year, but in reality to compel said defendant to agree to enter said association and submit to its rules and regulations. Further allegations of the bill are quoted as follows: "That at the said conference said Healy in the presence of the defendant Edward F. Abner, representing the AbnerDrury Brewing Company and acting for it in that behalf, and of Albert Carry, representing the defendant the National Capital Brewing Company and acting for it in that behalf, and of the defendant Bernard Katz, representing the Arlington Brewing Company, and acting for it in that behalf, informed the representative of the defendant, the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, that unless the last-named defendant should agree to confer with the representatives of the other four brewing companies representing the Brewers' Association aforesaid, and join said association and submit to its rules and exactions, particularly its requirement that the said Chr. Heurich Brewing Company should raise the price of its light beer to its customers to $6 per barrel, and sell only to such customers as the said association might allot Statement of the Case. to it, he, the said Healy, in his character as president of the International Brotherhood of Stationary Firemen, would not confer with said Chr. Heurich Brewing Company in respect to a contract between it and the said Local No. 63 of [166] the International Brotherhood of Stationary Firemen, nor permit its members to enter into the employment of said Chr. Heurich Brewing Company to serve the said defendant in the prosecution of its business. The said Healy then and there in the presence of the defendant Edward F. Abner, representing the Abner-Drury Brewing Company and acting for it in that behalf, and of Albert Carry, representing the defendant, the National Capital Brewing Company, and acting for it in that behalf, and of the defendant Bernard Katz, representing the Arlington Brewing Company, and acting for it in that behalf, further informed the representative of the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company that the said meeting was called for the purpose of compelling the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company to join said association composed of the other four defendant brewing corporations, and to raise the price of light beer to the retail liquor dealers to $6 per barrel, and to sell its beer only to such of the retail liquor dealers in the District as the association might authorize it to sell the same; and that, in the event of the said defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company refusing to submit to its demand, other workmen in the employ of said defendant the Chr. [Heurich] Brewing Company would be required to quit work, and that the product of said brewery would, through the influence of said Healy, be boycotted, meaning and intending thereby that he, the said Healy, had the power and means and would use the same to interfere with and prevent the sale of the product of said Chr. Heurich Brewing company to these complainants and other retail liquor dealers and to general consumers of beer within the District, unless the said defendant complied with the said demands. "11. The complainants further show that they are and have for some years past been engaged in the purchase and sale of the product of the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, and have a large demand for the same in their business; that if the said defendant the Chr. Heurich Statement of the Case. Brewing Company shall yield to the demands of the other defendants, and increase the price of the beer to $6 per barrel, the said increase of price will involve great loss and irreparable injury to these com[167] plainants and other retail liquor dealers similarly situated, and that, if the demands of said Healy and the said four defendant corporations composing said Brewers' Association are complied with by the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, these complainants and other retail liquor dealers will be prevented from purchasing and selling the product of the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company to their irreparable loss and injury, and the deprivation of their customers, who are accustomed to purchase the said product from these complainants and others selling the same. "12. Your complainants are further informed and believe and therefore charge that no disagreement or controversy has arisen betwen the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company and any of its employees; that no change in the services, hours of labor, or wages of the firemen employed by it is sought or desired by said firemen, and that the purpose of the defendant Healy and the defendant Crown in advising and commanding the said firemen to cease their employment with the said defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, as hereinafter set forth, is to embarrass said last-named defendant in its business, and compel it to abandon its competition in trade and its sale of its product at the price now charged by it to all consumers, and to compel it to increase the price to the sum of $6 per barrel, and to limit the sale thereof to certain specified purchasers, instead of extending the same to these complainants and all other retail liquor dealers. "13. Your complainants are further advised and therefore charge that the purpose and object of the conspiracy entered into among the said defendants the Abner-Drury Brewing Company, the National Capital Brewing Company, the Arlington Brewing Company, the Washington Brewery Company, and the said Crown and Healy, by causing a strike or refusal to work among the employees of the defendant the Chr. Heurich Brewing Company, is to stifle competition in |