New-York tribune., 1906-11-04
AFTER BANANA TRUST
SUIT FOR se.OOO.o0o BEGUN
Question of Boundaries of South
american Republics Figures.

CHlteu rTult company a S<OpDt.UDo concsrn
Of New Jersey. The plaintiff represented ~
the firm Of Wheeler Cortis & Haight No "a
State street. asks the United States Circus.
Court OF this district not only TO pass upon
an alleged conspiracy TO monopolizs and con-
troll the importation OF bananas to this country
but also Indirectly to determine the legal and
proper boundaries between the Republic Of Pan.
anna and the United States OF Colombia and
Costa Rica- The latter issue. the complaint sd-
nnfts. as well as the major portion OF the plain
tin's other rights as an American corporation
has been repeatedly referred TO the state au-
thorities at Washington. which have often
refused 70 interfere IN the matter. II Is alleged
that this has been because OF the Influence Of
the defendant company.
The petitioner charges that an alleged con-
spiracy IN restraint OF trade and foreign COM
merce has not only prevented the plaintiffs from
maintaining and operating banana plantation
in South America yielding an alleged month";
profit Of S94. 500. but also from realizing on an
investment of S4SO.O0O. The PLAINTIFF charges
in addition that the defendant has compelled il
TO abandon the construction Of a railway al
ready practically completed from the planta-
tions in Central America to Godacan. or the
coast OF Panama.
The total damages for which the complaint
The complaint charges that the defendant cor
poration. organized March 80. 1899. effected
combination with practically all the companies
and individuals then engaged in importing
bananas from Central and South America and
thu West Indies TO. this country. Prior 70 tns
combination. it IS alleged. the growers Of oa-
nanas realized a fair and reasonable price Tor
their fruit: that the defendant corporation ar
ranged TO control the importation OF bananas
and to prevent the complainant from eXefclshs
it's legal and natural rights In 1883 ana IsVo
the defendant effected a combination WIN ths
concArns mentioned il is alleged, which either
bacaroa a mart OF the defendants business, or
failed or retired. 70 extinguish all competition;
that IL caused the organization Of the Fruit DIS
patch Company which acted as the selling agent
OF all the defendants companies.
RIVAL CORPORATION ABSORBED.
TbA complaint then tells OF the formation Of
the Camors-McConviTe Company. competing
corporation. which was absorbed by the defend
ant laser and of the destroying of many snip
nents OF fruit to maintain prices established hy
the defendant. the loss being paid out OF con-
mon fund by the defendant companies
In 1904 the complaint charges the defendant
I'm carrying out it's unlawful combination and
conspiracy. induced the officials of the republic
OF Panama, II violation of the statutes OF the
United States. TO sign concessions granting to
the defendants certain rights OF shipping ba-
nanss i'm the Shanguinalo and Saxola districts
Of Panama the banana growing sections. That
since that time the defendant has carried on an
economic warfare on all other independent com
panies. underselling them at competing points
and forcing many 70 go out OF business.
In 1908 it is alleged that one Herbert /. M
Connell planted a banana plantation on the
banks Of the Saxola River. under the laws of The
United states of Colombia. ana tegan IN
building of a siding to Godacon, the nearest
seaport
II is also claimed that the President of France.
acting as referee between Colombia and Costa
U,ica il, Twins, the boundaries between the two
countries had recommended that the section in
Guiding the Mcconnell plantation be considered
within the confines Of Colombia, out that IdtV'
It became a part of the new Republic OF Fan
anna. That Governor Duran OF Colombia as
sured a concession 10 one Romero 10 oulid a
YaiIway TO the coast which was duly assigned
70 Mcconnell bur that later the same official
who became an attorney for the Defendant, rec
commended that the government OF costa Rca
ne permitted TO administer over that parJicul@s
territory No reason was given. II is alleged
why Colombia should have surrendered Jnat por-'
tou of its territory
In AnriI 1898 the complaint charges, the gov
erurnent of Costa Rica sent builders. who sur
veved the plantation controlled bv Mcconnell
Afterward. when Panama became a Tepuoic,
Mcconnell transferred his property to the plain
tiff bur in July. 1904 the Costa Rican soldiers
not only seized the plaintiffs plantation at the
fnstieatiOn of the defendant. but took in addl-
ton a cargo of supplies intended 20 be used IN
building the railway and prevented the building
Of tire latter.
The plaintiff has repeatedly. it Is asserted
urged the United States to interfere IN It's be-
half but that the defendant thwarted its every
effort and prevailed upon the Costa Rican gov
ernnent TO maintain it's soldiers on ths plain
tiff's plantation
DENIES EXISTENCE OF TRUST.
In defence the United Fruit Company admits
its Incorporation but alleges that the ba1ans
trade is still in active competition
Through Strong & Cadwalader the company
denies that the concerns mentioned were ooushe
to control the banana trade. or that contracts
were made to restrict the trade. That the de-
fendant holds and controls the stock OF the Fruit
Dispatch Company is admitted II is also ad-
mitted that Mcconnell planted the banana grove
on the Saxola River and constructed the railroad
In question, but the answer denies that ne hao
any legal right to do without proper con-
cession from either Colombia or the Costa Rlcan
government.
The defendant claims the boundary dispute
between Costa Rica and Colombia was referred
10 the President Of France. who made an award
in September. 1900 which placed the lands alons
the SaXOla River in the territory OF COLOMBIA
The lands in dispute north OF the river have al
ways been claimed by Costa Rica. SAYS ms
answer which government has exercised SOW
ereignty there from that time The defence
claims that the award Of the tract in quesllSn
was unsatisfactory 10 both nations. and JnaI thS
boundary is still matter OF dispute
All the other allegations Of the plaintn are
denied. -,
OF the complainant be dismissed without costs
~ def