Evening journal., 1905-07-03
BEEF TRUST MEN
ARE INDICTED
J. Ogden Armour and Sixteen
Others Held by Grand
Jury
FIVE COMPANIES ARE ACCUSED


Chicago, July 1.--Af;er an investiga-
ton Of several months, during which
more than 100 witnesses we're exam
ined, a federal grand jury has re-
turned indictments against II of the
men prominent in the beef-packing in
dustries for violation of the Sherman
Antitrust law and against four Off
cials of the Schwarzschild & Sulzber-
ger Company for alleged illegal rebat-
ing agreement with railroads.
Besides these Individual indictments
bills were voted against Armour &
Co. Swift & Co., NSson Morris & Co.,
Cudahy Packing Company and Fair
bank Canning Company.
The men indicted for alleged con-
spiracy in restraint of trade. which
constitutes a violation Of the Sheridan
act. are: J. Ogden Armour, president
of Armour & Co.; Charles Armour, of
Armour g. Co.; Arthur Meeker, gener-
al manager Armour g. Co.. T. ]. Con.
hers. director Armour & Co.; p. A.
Valentine. treasurer Armour & Co.;
Samuel McRoberts, assistant treasurer
Armour & Co.
Louis f. Swift, president of Swift &
Co.; Charles Swift, of Swift & Co.;
Lawrence A Carter, treasurer Swift &
Co.; Arthur f. Evans, attorney for
Swift & Co.; A. II. Veder, general
counsel for Swift & Co.; Edward Cud-
ahy of Cudahy & Co.; d. e. Hartwell,
secretary Swift & Co.; Edward f.
Swift, vice president Swift & Co.; Ed
ward Morris, secretary Nelson Morris
& Co.; Ira W. Morris. of Nelson Nor
ris & Co
The four employees of Schwarzschild
& Sulzberger who were indicted for
alleged rebating with the railroads are
all connected with the traffic depart
ment of the corporation.
The indictments voted for alleged
violation of the antitrust law were
identical in each instance. The indict-
ments contained each eight counts,
which were spread over 63 typewriter
pages The first and the second counts
of the indictments pertained only to
beef sold in domestic trade. The ninth
and tenth counts relate to the beef
sold in foreign trade.
The third count gives a conspiracy
in restrain of trade and commerce
among the states, and with foreign
nations in fresh. dried, smoked, cured,
canned and picked meats, and in GER
tain by-products of the packing indus
try.
The sixth count charges the castings
conspiracy to be an attempt to monop
olize trade and commerce in that com
modify In the United States and for
eign countries.
The seventh count sets forth partic
ulars concerning the organization OF
the National Packing Company, and
charges that the object and the effect
I OF that organization were 20 destroy
competition not only among the pack
ers who were interested in the Ma
tional Packing Company, but among
the ten smaller packing companies
which were consolidated by the de.
vice of organizing the National Pack
ing Company; and this is described
as a conspiracy in restraint of trade
and commerce.
The eighth count makes out the or
ganization of the National Packing
Company to be an attempt to monopO-
lie the same trade and commerce.
The first one of the indicted men to
offer bends was b, S. Cusey, indicted
for rebating with the railways He
appeared in court about one hour after
the indictments had been returned and
gave a bond of $4,000 for his appear
ance when wanted. The cases against
the defendants viii not be tried until
fall.
According 10 the Record Herald, the
packers who were indicted have au-
thorized their special counsel John s.
Miller. to file their petition for an in
| junction at his discretion in the United
States court. In fact, the notices in
forming the federal officials that peti
tion would be filed asking for an IN
junction already have been prepared
for service.
Attorney Miller stated that the
action seeking an injunction would be
uncommon, but not without precedent
cases being on record in several in
stances supporting the contemplated
move by the packers.
"The form of the action has moi
been thoroughly considered, or thought
out, - said Mr. Miller but that will be
settled later. My clients will ask fol
an injunction against prosecution un
der the idictments. on the grounds that
the prosecution viii be irregular. II
is a well-settled rule of law that where
a plaintiff goes into a court of equity
seeking an injunction, and obtains it
the same plaintiff cannot institute
criminal proceedings against the de
fendant The packing firms are now
under an injunction made permanent
by Judge Crosscup in the circuit court
If they have violated that injunction
they ought 10 be cited for contempt
before that tribunal, instead of being
indicted in the u S. district court