PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S ADMINISTRATION

SEPT. 14, 1901-MARCH 4, 1909

[Philander C. Knox, Attorney-General, April 5, 1901, to June 30, 1904; William H. Moody, Attorney-General, July 1, 1904, to Dec. 16, 1906; Charles J. Bonaparte, Attorney-General, Dec. 17, 1906, to March 4, 1909.]

1.-United States v. Northern Securities Company, Great Northern Railway Company, Northern Pacific Railway Company, et al., 120 F. R., 721; 193 U. S., 197. (Circuit Court, Minnesota, April 9, 1903.) (United States Supreme Court, March 14, 1904.)

This suit was brought on March 10, 1902, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota, to enjoin the defendant, the Northern Securities Company, from purchasing, acquiring, receiving, holding, voting, or in any manner acting as the owner of any of the shares of the capital stock of the two defendant railway companies, and to restrain the defendant railway companies from permitting the securities company to vote any of the stock of said railways, or from exercising any control whatsoever over the corporate acts of either of said railway companies, it being charged that the securities company was formed for the purpose of acquiring a majority of the capital stock of the two railway companies in order that it might in that way effect practically a consolidation of the two companies by controlling rates and restricting and destroying competition, in violation of the Sherman anti-trust law. The Circuit Court on April 9, 1903, entered a decree in favor of the Government as prayed in the petition, and this decree was, on March 14, 1904, affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States.

2.-United States v. Swift & Co. et al., 122 F. R., 529; 196 U. S., 375.

Suit brought on May 10, 1902, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois to restrain the defendants (commonly known as the Beef Trust), and engaged in the buying of live stock and the selling of dressed meats, from carrying out an unlawful conspiracy entered into between themselves and with the various railway companies, to suppress competition and to obtain a monopoly in the purchase of live stock and in the selling of dressed meats. A temporary restraining order was granted on May 20, 1902. The defendants having demurred to the bill, the court, after hearing, on April 18, 1903, overruled the demurrers and granted a preliminary injunction. The defendants having failed to answer, the court, on May 26, 1903, entered an order making the decree final and perpetually enjoining the further operations of the trust. The defendants, on August 14, 1903, appealed from the final decree of the Circuit Court to the Supreme Court of the United States, where decree was affirmed January 30, 1905.

3.-United States v. The Federal Salt Company et al.

Suit brought in the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California, on October 15, 1902, to restrain the defendants (known as the Salt Trust) from unlawfully combining and conspiring to suppress competition in the manufacture and sale of salt in the States west of the Rocky Mountains, in violation of the Sherman anti-trust law. A temporary restraining order was issued on that date, and the cause coming on for hearing, the court, on November 10, 1902, granted an injunction pendente lite, thus, in effect, making the restraining order perpetual. No appeal was taken from this order.

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

On February 28, 1903, the grand jury for the United States District Court for the Northern District of California returned an indictment against the Salt Trust for having violated the anti-trust law. On May 12, 1903, the company pleaded guilty and the court imposed a fine of $1,000 which was paid.

5.-United States v. Jacksonville Wholesale Grocers' Association.

A proceeding in equity, instituted on September 12, 1903, in the United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of Florida, for the purpose of dissolving a combination of wholesale grocers, operating in violation of the anti-trust law. November 1, 1907, dismissed. 6.-United States v. General Paper Co. et al.

December 27, 1904, a bill in equity was filed in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota against the General Paper Co. and twenty-three other corporations engaged in the manufacture and sale of paper, alleging that they had entered into a combination and conspiracy to restrain trade and commerce in the manufacture of news print, manila, fibre, and other papers by making the General Paper Co. their common sales agent. On May 11, 1906, the court ordered judgment in favor of the Government, dissolving the combination and affording all relief prayed in the bill. (See also Nelson v. United States, 201 U. S., 92; Alexander v. United States, id., 117.)

7.-United States v. Armour & Co. et al.

After the affirmance by the Supreme Court of the decree of the Circuit Court in United States v. Swift & Company, complaints from various quarters were made to the Department of Justice that the combination still continued. The department thereupon began an exhaustive inquiry before the grand jury for the Northern District of Illinois, which resulted in the return of an indictment on July 1, 1905, against Armour & Co., J. Ogden Armour, president; Patrick A. Valentine, treasurer; Arthur Neekler, general manager; Thomas J. Connors, superintendent, and Samuel A. McRoberts, assistant treasurer, of Armour & Co.; the Armour Packing Co., and Charles W. Armour, president; Swift & Co., and Louis F. Swift, president; Lawrence A. Carton, treasurer; D. Edwin Hartwell, secretary, and Albert H. Veeder and Robert C. McManus and Arthur F. Evans, agents of Swift &

Co.; the Fairbank Canning Co., and Edward Morris, vice president; Ira N. Morris, secretary of the Fairbank Canning Co.; the Cudahy Packing Co., and Edward A. Cudahy, vice-president and general manager of the Cudahy Packing Co. Against this indictment many preliminary objections were urged. All were disposed of in favor of the Government, except certain special pleas of immunity in bar, based upon information concerning the matters for which the defendants were indicted, which they had given to the Department of Commerce and Labor. The court sustained the pleas so far as the individual defendants were concerned and overruled them with respect to the corporations.

8.-United States v. MacAndrews & Forbes Company et al., (149 Fed., 823; 212 U. S., 585.)

In June, 1906, the Grand Jury returned an indictment against the MacAndrews & Forbes Company, the J. S. Young Company, a corporation of Maine, and Karl Jungbluth and Howard E. Young, their respective presidents, for illegally combining and conspiring to regulate the interState trade and sale in licorice paste, an article used in the manufacture of plug and smoking tobacco, snuff, and cigars. Defendants entered pleas of not guilty, with leave to withdraw or demur and on July 9, 1906, demurrers were filed by all of the defendants. Dec. 4, 1906, the demurrers were overruled. Dec. 19, 1906, trial commenced. Jan. 10, 1907, MacAndrews & Forbes Company was found guilty on first and third counts of indictment, the J. S. Young Company guilty on first and third counts; verdict of acquittal as to individual defendants. MacAndrews & Forbes Company fined $10,000. J. S. Young Company fined $8,000. 8a.-The Tobacco Trust Cases. (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S., 43; McAlister v. Henkel, id., 90; 149 Fed., 823; 212 U. S., 585.)

These cases grew out of an investigation by a Federal Grand Jury in the Southern District of New York of the American Tobacco Company and the MacAndrews & Forbes Company, believed to be violating the anti-trust laws. The matter having been brought to the attention of the Grand Jury by the officers of the Department of Justice, special counsel were appointed for the purpose of investigation and prosecution. Subpoenas duces tecum were served upon the officers of the companies directing them to produce papers and other documentary evidence belonging to the corporations. They refused to obey the subpoena to answer questions propounded to them. The Circuit Court adjudged them in contempt and committed them until they should produce the books and answer the questions. They appealed to another Judge of the same court for writs of habeas corpus, which, upon hearing, were discharged. Upon appeal the Supreme Court affirmed the orders denying the writs.

9. United States v. Metropolitan Meat Company et al.

Bill filed in equity in October, 1905 in the United States Circuit Court for Hawaii, to restrain the operation of alleged unlawful combinations in

restraint of the trade in beef and beef products. Demurrer to bill overruled October 2, 1906. Pending.

10.-United States v. Nome Retail Grocers' Association.

November 4, 1905, the United States Attorney for the Second Division of Alaska filed a bill in equity against the Nome Retail Grocers' Association, alleging a combination to fix prices and to suppress competition. The defendants agreed to the entry of a decree granting all the relief prayed for in the petition. A decree dissolving the combination was entered accordingly.

11.-United States v. Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis et al.

Petition filed in Circuit Court of United States for the Eastern District of Missouri on December 1, 1905, to enjoin the defendant railroads from continuing an unlawful combination entered into between them to operate Eads Bridge and Merchants Bridge as a common agency of interstate commerce. Upon disagreement of Circuit Judges, case was carried to the Supreme Court and was remanded by that court for further proceedings. Government then attempted to secure rehearing in the Circuit Court and failed, and appealed to the Supreme Court, where the case was argued and is awaiting decision.

12.—United States v. Allen & Robinson et al.

Bill filed in October, 1905, in the Circuit Court for the District of Hawaii, alleging unlawful combination to control the trade in lumber in that Territory. Answers filed January 2, 1906. Pending.

13.-United States v. Otis Elevator Co. et al.

Bill filed March 7, 1906, in the United States Circuit Court for the Northern District of California against the Otis Elevator Co. and a number of other corporations and individuals, in which it was alleged that they were maintaining a combination in restraint of trade in the matter of the manufacture and sale of elevators. June 1, 1906, a decree was entered by consent dissolving the combination and granting the relief prayed. 14.-United States v. F. A. Amsden Lumber Company et al.

Indictment returned in the District Court of Oklahoma, May 4, 1906, for violation of the Sherman Act in restricting competition and maintaining prices in the sale of lumber. May 13, 1907, change of venue granted to Grant County. September 25, 1907, pleas of guilty and fines imposed aggregating $2,000, which were paid.

15.-United States v. National Association of Retail Druggists et al.

Bill in equity filed May 9, 1906, in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Indiana against the National Association of Retail Druggists, alleging a combination in restraint of inter-State trade in the sale of drugs and proprietary medicines. May 9, 1907, final decree entered by agreement, giving the Government all the relief prayed for in the petition. 16.-United States v. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Company et al.

May 25, 1906, the Federal Grand Jury for the Middle District of Tennessee, upon information furnished by the Department of Justice, returned

an indictment against 31 corporations and 25 individuals engaged in the fertilizer business in the States of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Tennessee, charging them with engaging in a conspiracy in violation of the Federal anti-trust act and with conspiring to commit an offence against the United States, viz., the aforesaid conspiracy, in violation of section 5440 of the Revised Statutes. The fertilizer manufacturers combined to fix the price of fertilizers in the territory mentioned and to apportion the trade among themselves according to an agreed percentage. July 11, 1906, all the defendants appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States from an order of the Circuit Court of the Eastern District of Virginia denying the right of habeas corpus and remanding them to the custody of the marshal for removal to the Middle District of Tennessee for trial. The case before the Supreme Court was argued on December 3, 1906, and on March 4, 1907, the judgment of the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Virginia was reversed and the case remanded to that court for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court. April 17, 1908, various motions, pleas in abatement, and demurrers filed. July 3, 1908, certain motions and demurrers overruled, plea in abatement allowed, and indictment quashed.

17.-United States v. American Ice Company et al.

July 12, 1906, indictment returned in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, charging an unlawful agreement to control prices and restrict competition in the sale of ice. Case pending.

18.-United States v. Chandler Ice and Cold Storage Plant et al.

Sept. 19, 1906, indictment returned in the District Court for the Territory of Oklahoma against the Chandler Ice and Cold Storage Plant and others, charging a combination to apportion territory in the matter of the sale of ice. May 5, 1907, demurrer filed by defendant Groves and overruled. May 20, 1907, demurrer filed by Chandler Ice and Cold Storage plant. Dismissed.

19.-United States v. Alfred M. Gloyd et al.

Sept. 21, 1906, indictment returned against Alfred M. Gloyd and others in the District Court for the Territory of Oklahoma, charging a combination to maintain prices and restrict competition in the sale of lumber. Dismissed.

20.-United States v. People's Ice and Fuel Company, a corporation, and W. B. Lount.

Oct. 23, 1906, indictment returned in the District Court for the Territory of Arizona, charging a combination to control prices and restrict competition in the sale of ice. Jan 5, 1907, trial commenced. Verdict not guilty as to People's Ice and Fuel Company and company held to next Grand Jury. Trial of W. B. Lount continued over term. Oct. 16, 1907, plea in bar filed. Oct. 17, 1907, plea in bar sustained. 21.-United States v. Demund Lumber Company et al.