The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-06-05
A Tait,s Case Concluded in Judge
Clancy's Court.
CHARGE OF THE COURT
Strongly Against Trusts and Uulaw-
ful Combinations-The First Boy
colt Case to Come to
Trial I'm Butte.


sale dealers was concluded in Judge
Clancy's court yesterday. and was sub
mitted to the jury at $3.50 o'clock last
evening, but at 8 O'Clock this morning
they had not yet reached a verdict. The
case is the first suit growing out OF a
boycott that ever came to trial in Butte
and the result will be watched with in
crest by many. The courts charge to the
fury was strongly against trusts and
like combinations for unlawful pur-
poses. but organizations for self-interest
and the general good In a lawful way
were approved.
Among the witnesses who testified at
the trial yesterday morning were w. A.
Clark of South Butte, j. NJ. Barber of
the Independent market, William LUX
ton of the Beaverhead company and
others. who testified that the defend
ant companies. all wholesalers. had
never notified them not to buy meat
from the plaintiffs. Clark admitted
that he had received a letter from the
Retailers association. telling him not
10 buy any more from them. and that
ne notified the plaintiffs that he would
run no more chances. The other wit
nesses also testified that they had
bought meat from the plaintiffs since
the alleged boycott was declared
against them. The minute book of the
Retailers association was introduced in
evidence. and both the defendants and
plaintiffs read portions of 1t TO the
jury. The former read to show that
Hart. one of the plaintiffs. had Joined
the association. n the plaintiffs read
an entry to the effect that Campbell &
Parr, attorneys for the defendants. had
met with and conferred with the retail
ers at one of their meetings.
Attorney Hinkle made the opening
argument for the plaintiffs and said
that whether the defendants were
members of the boycotting association
or not the evidence showed that they
were In the conspiracy against the
plaintiffs. They put w 5000 each to
the association. to be forfeited IL they
sold meat to the plaintiffs or any other
party not a member of the association.
The latter sent out notices to the retail
dealers that the plaintiffs had refused
to join the association. and that any
n patronizing them would be subject
to a fine. The notice stated hat the
defendants, the Butte Butchering COM
pany, Beaverhead Meat company, Sill
yer Bow Meat company, Montana
Dressed Meat company and the Butte
Dressed Meat company, on the other
hand, had the Endorsement of the as
ISOLATION. having complied with it's
rules. The evidence showed. however.
that the wholesalers were actually
members of the Retailers association.
for MIR. TAFT had been summoned to
appear before the association, and he
was informed that he would have TO
Join in order To be permitted to do
business in the city. There was moth
ing said to him about simply entering
int a CONTRACT with the association.
but they told him he should join the
association and put VI $500 in cash, and
against other dealers n place him
self civilly and criminally liable for an
unlawful conspiracy.
c. NJ. Parr N A. j. Campbell for
the defense argued hat the plaintiffs
were not damaged. and If they were
damaged that the defendants were not
liable or responsible. but. that IL my
one was liable it was the retail deal
ers' association or it's embers
Judge +. n. HARDWOOD closed the
arguments for the plaintiffs. after
which the court ave it's Instructions to
the jury. which We're interesting as be-
ing the first presented to "A jury i'm
Butte on the boycott question.
A portion Of the instructions on that
point reads as follows:
Section 4276 of the civil code is as
follows: Every person who suffers
detriment from the unlawful act or
u A'AAA AhAa2 AioAt
the person in fault a compensation
fherefor in money. which is called dam
age Section 4271 of the same code is
as follows: 'Detriment is a loss or
harm suffered in person or property
Section 4212 of the same code is as fol-
lows: Damages may be awarded in a
judicial proceeding for detriment re-
sultlng after the mmencement there
of or certain to result in the future
Section 1880 of the same code is as fol-
lows: In any action for a breach of
an obligation not arising from contract
where the defendant has been guilty
II oppression, fraud or malice. actual
or presumed. the jury. in addition to
the actual damages. may give dam
ages for the sake Of example. M by
way of furnishing the defendants Sec
ton 1880 of the same code is as fol
lows: For the breach of an obligation
not arising from contract, the measure
of damages. except where otherwise
expressly provided by this code. is the
amount which Will compensate for al
the detriment proximstely caused
thereby. whether IL could have beer
anticipated or not
1T is unlawful for any person. cor.
poration. stock company or association
of persons in this state To directly 81
indirectly combine or form h /,
known as a trust or make any contrac
with any person or persons, corpora
tons or stock companies foreign ol
domestic, through their stockholders
directors. officers or in n mann
whatever. for the purpose of fixing tn
price or regulating the production o
any article of or OF the pro
duct of the soil for consumption by tn
people, or to create or carry out an,
restriction i'm trade to limit production
or increase or reduce the price of mer
chandise or commodities. or to proven
competition in merchandise or commo
dities, or to fix a standard price OF an
article of merchandise. commerce o
produce intended for sale. b
which its use or consumptio
will be in any way controlled
or TO create a monopoly in the manu-
facture. sale or transportation Of an
such article. or to enter into an obi
cation by which they shall bind other
or themselves not TO manufacture. Sc
or transport such article below a com
mon standard or figure. or by .whic