The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-01-09
RIPS THE TRUST.
Attorney General Moody Files
Brief in Beef Combine Case.

Washington. Jan. 9.--Attorney Gen
eral Moody resumed his argument on
behalf of the government before the
supreme court of the United States
in the case of Swift & Co. versus the
United States commonly known as the
Beef Trust case begun last Friday
Mr.. Moody said none of the agree
ments or acts complained of related
to manufacture or production but to
comm erce-cOmmerce as distinguish
ed from manufa cture or production.
They do not accomplish fusion OF
property interests, he said. but are on
the contrary simply agreements be-
tween strangers to each others bust
ness affecting their freedom of action
in certain respects, and by that con-
sideration the case at bar is shown to
be devoid of those features from which
differences of opinion arose in the
Northern Securities case. He also
pointed out differences between this
and the Knight and Hopkins cases.
Thus he said the inquiry is narrowed
down to only two questions for the
determination of the court.
In conclusion Mr.. Moody said:
Mr.. Moody's Argument.
In conclusion, Mr.. Moody said:
THESE are the main subjects of the
unlawful conspiracy among the defend
ants. Others are set forth in the petit
ton, the purpose of which is to make
more effective the main conspiracy and
render it less easy for the defendants
themselves to escape from the perform
ance of the unlawful conspiracy which
they have formed. I will now consider
these subsidiary agreements.
'F'irst-In the seventh paragraph Of
the petition it appears that the defend
ants have agreed upon this device: In
pursuance of the conspiracy among
themselves their agents bid up the price
of live stock at certain selected times
to an abnormal degree. This naturally
induces the shipment from other states
Of 70 int NrHa he
is bid UP in quantities much larger than
under normal conditions. Then, TAX
ing advantage Of this congestion of the
markets they refrain from bidding
against each other in the purchase of
live stock with the result that the pro-
ducers and owners of the stock are
forced to sell at ruinous prices. Thus
the unlawful conspiracy to refrain from
bidding against each other is made
dOubly profitable and the great profits
which come from the transaction in
turn increase the power of the combi-
nation and tend to fasten npon the peo-
pie monopoly. The conspiracy in
this case is ancillary to the conspiracy
to refrain from bidding and to the crea-
ton Of the monopoly which this whole
case discloses.
''Second-It is alleged in the eighth
paragraph that for the purpose of aid
ing in the raising, lowering and fixing
and maintaining of uniform prices for
fresh meat, the defendants collusively
meats to the various markets through
out the country. The word 'collusively'
fairly interpreted, means that they cur
tailed shipments by agreements with
lions sometimes may be entirely Iegi-
innate. This consideration is recogniz-
ed in the decree which exempts from
its prohibition the curtafling of ship
ments made in good faith to prevent
the congestion of markets.
"Third-In paragraph eight, penalties
are imposed against each other by de-
PENDANTS for all deviations from the
prices fixed which needs no special
comment.
"Fourth-In paragraph eight, also.
uniform rules for the giving of credits
are agreed upon. This of itself might
be harmless; but its purpose is ancil-
larry to the main conspiracy stated in
that paragraph, namely, the suppress
sion of all competition among the de-
PENDANTS. They viii not allow them
selves even to compete for the term of
credit which may be given to their re-
spective customers. No purchaser may
go from one to another of these defend
ants and obtain the advantage of a
single days delay in the shipment Of
his bill.
"Fifth-The same purpose is behind
the agreement alleged in the ninth
paragraph of the petition, to make and
The price of meat is uniform; the terms
of credit are uniform; even the rates of
carriage are uniform; and all this comes |
about by the agreement of the parties
and is designed in the most effective
way to prohibit in the minutest details |
all possible competition in prices.
II have now discussed separately all |
the agreements and acts of the defend |
ants which were complained of as un-
lawful in the petition and enjoined by |
the decree Of the court below. / have |
to show, with respect to |
each of them, that they relate to inter |
state commerce and either restrained /
Or monopoIized it within the meaning |
Of the law. I should be unwilling, |
however, to rest the case here. There |
IS a larger view of it to be taken than |
appears from the allegations in the Pc
tition considered separately.
sThese defendants are engaged in in
.erstate commerce. The petition shows /
typical case of interstate commerce.
If the business which they do exclusive /
Of manufacture. is not interstate com
merce, there can be no such thing out
side of transportation. They buy their /
raw material which is gathered togeth- |
eg from all the cattle raising states /
and territories Of the union and sent to |