Wausau pilot. [volume] (Wausau, Wis.) 1896-1940, 1902-05-27
TIES Up BEEF TRUST.
FEDERAL COURT ENJOlNS PACK
ERS FROM COMBINING.
Meat Trust Made Subject of Temporary
Order Against Conspiracy TO Control
Prices-De Defendants Present No Proof
to Offset Evidence Against Them.

The first blow against the big packing
houses charged with maintaining a meat
trust was struck in the UniteG States
Circuit Court at Chicago Tuesday after
noon. Judge Peter S. Grosscup. after s
hearing. granted the motion of the United
States for temporary injunction re-
stralning the defendant packers from fur
tnef operations under the alleged illegal
agreements lin restraint of trade and
commerce complained of in the bill for
an injunction.
There was no resistance on the part Of
the defendants to the granting of the
motion. John s. Miller, as their general
counsel, consented to the entering Of the
order as prayed by the government Al
the same time Mr. Miller stated the POI
sitioh the packers would take in the
case. In effect the statement amounts
TO denial of the allegations Of the gov
eminent aud a demand for a full and
complete hearing of the case later. IN
accordance with the practice of the Unit
ed States courts.
Evidence which is expected to play a
prominent part in the prosecution of the
cases was disclosed in the affidavit &c ID.
w. Meredith, former employee of Ar
mour & Co. and Swift & Co. Meredith
gives the details of alleged meetings of
the packers Eastern agents to regulate
prices, apportion territory. and take 9TH
er steps TO prevent improbable competi-
ton. Mr.. Meredith charges that. to force
up prices, the shipment of cattle to the
East was checked at different times. The
former emp,oye also gives the details of
the alleged BLACKLIST maintained by
the packers, and declares that when a
company was fined for violation of agree
ment that the employee at fault was COM
peeled to pay the fine or be discharged.
Once discharged. the affidavit alleges, the
man found it impossible to secure en-
ployment from any of the big six"
Says They Are Eot Guilty.
In conserving to the granting of the
restraining order the counsel for the de-
PENDANTS specifically stated that in view
of the fact the defendants denied all the
charges against them they could not be
harmed by an order intended to prevent
operations of which they had not been
guilty and which they did not contem-
plate.
Thereupon, after an argument between
the opposing counsel cseI the wording of
the restraining order. Judge Grosscup
himself dictated an order acceptable to all
and it was entered of record in the court.
The temporary injunction is now in full
force and effect.
In case of violation of any of the
terms Of the order the defendants would
be subject to contempt proceedings, pun
ishable by a fine or by imprisonment or
both in the discretion of the court
In the regular course of practice tie
defendants have until July Z to enter
their appearance and until Aug. to. file
an answer demurrer, or plea. Unless
the defensA should move dissolution of
the restrai ming order no developments are
expected in the case until that time.
That che defendants will seek to in
terpose a legal defense to the govern
merits suit is regarded as assured rs a
result Of the preliminary hearing That
is the opinion of Solicitor General j. X.
Richards and United States Attorney s.
II. Bethea and others interested in the
case