The Hawaiian gazette., 1906-10-05
TRUST
DECISION
trrom wednesday.s AdevertIserl


cision in the beef trust case overriding
he demurrers of the defendants. In
GLIDING the Metropolitan Meat Conn
pany and many graziers. and giving
them an opportunity to make answer
In thirty days along the lines OF n
direct reply to the allegations of the
United States that beef trust exists
here
The bill was brought by the United
States. 1t alleges there Is a combina-
ton and agreement between the Me
tropolitan Meat Company and a large
number OF the graziers of the Terri
tory under which they agreed to sell
only to the Metropolitan Meat Com
pany. and the Metropolitan Meat Com
pany agreed to buy from them, and
that the graziers and Metropolitan
were to stand together to prevent all
other dealing in fresh beef here.
Twenty-Five of the defendants demurr-
ed to the bill alleging that 1t was tech
nically defective under the statute, In
that the bill had not properly set forth
any offense under the United States
antitrust statute.
Twenty-eight of the defendants filed
answers on the merits of the bill deny
ing the truth of the allegations in the
bill.
The decision rendered by Judge Dole
refers to the twenty-five graziers who
filed demurrers and does not deal with
the merits of the question.
Judge Dole holds that the bill has
technically described an offense and d.
reefs the twenty-five demurring de-
PENDANTS to answer on the merits of
the bill and gives them twenty days
in which to do so.
The reading of the decision on the
demurrer took just an hour and was
listened to by number of attorneys
including Assistant United States Dis
trict Attorney Dunno, who represented
the plaintiff United States; attorneys
Highton. Stanley, Thurston, Derby,
Wilmington, Davis, Marx, Peterson,
Olson and Perry.
Judge Dole's decision is in part as
follows:
lin this case, however, the bill al
leges that the combination, truit and
conspiracy charged was to be q fected
by means of an agreement between the
Metropolitan and the remaining defen-
dants and each of them, whereby the
latter agreed not to engage in the re-
tail trade in beef cattle and fresh
beef in the Territory as competitors of
the Metropolitan, nor produce, deal in
or deliver beef cattle and fresh beef to
or for any competitor of the Metropol-
itan, and would prevent and discour-
age by every possible means and man.
ner within their power all importa-
lions Of beef cattle and fresh beef into
the Territory by anyone else, to or for
any competitor in the Territory of the
defendants or any of them; and where
by the Metropolitan agreed with the
defendants and each of
them to purchase it's entire demands
for beef cattle and fresh beef from
them at an agreed price, which should
be the same to each of them, and to
apportion the quantities so purchased
among them, and that 1t would not
produce, deal in, purchase or import
into the Territory any beef cattle ana
fresh beef other than such beef cattle
and fresh beef as it purchased or
should purchase from them, and would
prevent and discourage by every pos
sible means and manner in it's power.
all importations into the Territory of
beef cattle and fresh beef by anyone
lants or any of them, and that it was
further agreed that the price so fixed
10 be paid to each of the remaining de-
should not be changed in any
manner by the demand for fresh beef
n the localities supplies by the Metro
,olitan, nor by the supply of beef cat
lie available for such localities, save
by the consent of the remaining de-
endants.
Here is an agreement to do definite
Kings and to refrain from doing def
lite things in order to effectuate the |
alleged combination.
I'm the case before the court the re-
naming defendants can not be COM
,elled to engage in the retail trade of
,eef cattle and fresh beef in the Ter
itory, but they may be enjoined against |
under agreements not to en- |
rage in such trade as competitors of
he Metropolitan, such agreements be-
ng obviously in restraint of trade;
md so as to the other stipulations of
he alleged agreement; the covenants
If the remaining defendants to refuse
% deal with any and all competitors
If the Metropolitan, and to try to pre-
vent importations by others than
in favor OF any such COM
,etitor, look like agreements in re-
'traint of trade in the Territory: and
he stipulations of the Metropolitan to
purchase it's entire supply from the re- +,
naming defendants at an greed price :
which should be the same for each of
hem, and to apportion the quantities
purchased among them, and that 1t
would not produce, deal In or import