New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-06-20
This Magnificent Hotel
ICE COMPANY'S BRIEF.
REPLY TO THE ARGUMENT OF THE
ATTORNEY-GENERAIA

Albany, june 1s.-Justice Alden Chester to-day
EeOsived from the American Ice Company its
brief n reply TO the argument Of the Attorney
General against making permanent the writ Of
prohibition which restraints Referee AIyer Nuss-
baum from examining the officers OF that COM
pany In the proceedings instituted against the
company before Justice Chase.
David wilcox, the attorney. IN his brief says
81 part that Il would have been idle course to
pursue II the statute were constitutional and the
Acknowledgements petition stated case coming
within its terms. II would be useless 70 attempt
10 Vacate the order by raising issues Of fact re-
ggrding the allegations OF the petition. Such an
effort would naturally be met at once with the
suggestion that the facts must be tried IN the
action. and could not be determined preliminarily
upon aft1dav1ts. Especially would this be the case
e tie statute valid. In view Of the fact that
Its terms deprive the court Of any discretion re-
garding the granting Of the order and provide that
SITS duty IS TO DO on the application Of the At
forney-GenerRl. The AttoTney-GeneraPs brief con-
tsins the statement that he has understood the
court TO intimate that the only question II would
consider is whether the petition is sufficient
to Justify the order Of Justice Chase.
This statement is certainly not based upon any
thing said by the court, and may be properly
characterized a. a gTatu1tous assumption that the
court VIII not consider objections 10 the statute
which the Attorney-General seems indisposed to
answer. Similarly It VIII be noticed that the At
torney-General has failed TO file any memorandum
IN opposition the granting OF the permanent writs
ing TO say regarding the constitutional objections
which are raised IN these proceedings. AS pointed
out. the conclusions Of the Attorney-General
garding the effect OF the acts stated such that
they led to e monopoly. Of no Importance. The
question Is whether the facts alleged show any
illegal action II they do not under the authorities
stated in the principal belief the results not
illegal. AS to the allegations regarding the price
OF ice. It may again be said that there IS no sug
gestion in the petition that the present price is
unreasonable, IN view OF existing conditions but
merely that the American Ice Company raised the
price of its property 70 enable it TO pay
Giyidencs: This does not allege anything unlawful
The Acknowledgement IS IN the position Of claim
ing that after the American Ice Company had
penies, the control Of their property be en-
Joined es act IN contamination, although It IS
the result Of perfectly lawful transaction. The
Acknowledgements statement IN support of this
singular contention IS merely that IL needs argu-
ment 70 show the existence Of q monopoly.
The authorities upon the principal brief show
that. on the contrary, wherever anything Of the
sort has been attempted II has been held to be
utterly contrary 10 the sot fundamental consti-
tutonel guarantees The Attorney Generals silence
upon the subject impressively. shows that moth
ing be said in defence Of this violation Of the
underlying principles Of Anglo-Saxon liberties.