Bryan morning eagle. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1898-1909, 1899-12-06
IMPORTANT DECISION.
judge Peckham Gives One Adverse
TO AddystOne Pipe Case.
TRUST Is INVOLVED.
The Opinion Rendered Says Il l. a
Violation Of the Consultation.
The Decision Of the Court
Of Appeals Sustained.

Washington Dec 3. - The United
States supreme court has handed down
an opinion Ia the Adiystons pipe case
involving the constitutionality Of the
combination ~ pipe manufacturer
which u was charged was trust The
decision l. adverse 10 the trust and re-.
aliirms the opinion Of the court Of ap.
peal- Tor tho Sixth district
In reviewing the case. Judge peckham.
WIN handed down the opinion. said that
II had been brought under the antitru.,
act Of 1891 and that an injunction was
asked o. "nilin the siH corporations On.
gagged iu the manufacture Of water aud
gas pipe which composed the combina.
ton from continuing 20 DO cuisines.
under the agreement by which they had
divided the territory Of the United States
among themselves and by which they
hal arranged to fix prices Under this
agreement. the member. II the comb.
nation provided for auctioning of the
right 20 make bids for supplying with
pipe. elite. not IN allotted territory. the
successful bidder 20 meet no opposition
from any other members Of the trust. or
II any other bids were made none Of
them should be- higher than that oi the
company 10 which the award had been
made by the combination In case.
where bids We're asked 10 the territory
allotted % members Of the combination.
the agreement was that no bids should
BE- made except under the supervision
OF the company in charge u that ter.
rit0ry under the agreement
The charge was that such a combina.
tion was violation Of the clause Of the
constitution regulating interstate com
merce
The district court "a which the case
was first heard refused 20 take this view
OF II. but It was reversed hy the court
OF appeals Of the Sixth circuit which
held the combination % be- antagonistic
10 the constitution. ordering the ifsu.
auce n the injunction prayed for This
latter decision was affirmed by tho &C.
tion Of the supreme court, with a modi-
fcation that the decision should be con.
s,rued as applying toiuterstate business
only
There were two question, before the
court 10 connection with the case The
first was whether the constitutional
clause for the regulation Of interstate
commerce applied % individuals and %
corporations. and second whether II
the clause should be found 20 20 apply.
the cumhination j. a regulation 81 inter
state commerce
The court held that the constitutional
clause did apply 10 individuals aud cor.
poration- and that the agreement does
by %, provisions restrict aud restrain
commerce between the states Hence
the agreement was decided 90 be- void a.
applying % interstate business and the
injunction sustained.
Tho six companies composing the
combination affected were the Adly.
stone Pipe aud Steel company of Gin.
clunsti, Dennis Long 81 Co Of Louis
VILE, the Howard.Harrisou Iron Co Of
Admission Ala the South pitrburg
Pipe Works of South Pitt.burg. Tenn
aud the Chattanooga Foundry aud Pipe
works Of Chattanooga Tenn Their
agreement provided that there should
b. no competition between the compan.
les "a 30 states iu the manufacture aud
sale Ut cast IRON pipe
The Ease was brought and first tried
Ia tho circuit court Tor the eastern dis
trict ~ tennessee