The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1907-12-16

the grand jury in Salt Lake with regard
10 the food combines is the decision rem
dered by Denver court that there ex-
lists in that city vigorous and healthy
grocers' trust. or. rather. there did prior
TO the time when the court granted the
injunction prayed for by the attorney gen
eral. A large number were made de-
PENDANTS by the attorney general, who
brought the action in the name of the peo-
PIE. The action was the result of a long
fight on the part OF some of the news
papers Of Denver. and the attorney gen
eral accepted their suggestion that suit
be brought for an injunction.
In lengthy address from the bench
Judge q. ". Allen delivered a scathing
rebuke TO all combines, not only IN Den
yer. but elsewhere as well. Extracts
from Judge Aliens opinion follow:
Supply and Demand.
Il think II is not extravagant to say
that II Is the doctrine announced by all
respectable courts that the law of sup
ply and demand should regulate prices,
and especially when the necessities of life
are considered. That uniformity extends
20 the announcement that any conduct
by an individual or individuals associated
together which tends To the restraint Of
trade. TO the sitting Of competition. 20
the establishment of prices upon an ar
bitrary basis, without considering the
matter Of supply and demand. is illegal.
subversive of public policy and should be
prohibited. Sometimes such conduct is
PROMPTED by statute; sometimes the pun
lie is led to the common law rule of con-
duct as applying to the case and II ap-
pears 10 be the consensus Of opinion
among the courts that wherever the leg
islature has failed to enact statute on
the subject the common law is in force
and can be applied with as equal
facility by courts of equity and can be
made as fruitful in the line of lettering
such public conditions, so far as unlimited
and unrestrained trade is concerned, as
under statute.
Quotes Marshall Decision.
In the case Of the state on the infor-
nation of the attorney general VS.. the
Armour Packing company ct al, Justice
Marshall. under the facts presented in
that case. felt called upon TO say:
Competition is the life of trade. Pools
trusts and conspiracies to fix or main
tain the prices of the necessities OF IRE
strike at the foundation of government.
OF the body polite; wither the energies
of competitors; blight individual invest
ments in legitimate business drive small
and honest dealers out or business tOT
themselves. and make them mere "hew-
ers of wood and drawers of water for
the trust, raise the cost OF. living and
lower the price of wages take from the
average American freeman the ability TO
supply his family with necessary. ade-
quate and wholesome food, force the boys
away from school and into the various
branches or trade ana TABOR, ana the girls
into workshops and other avenues OF
business and make them breadWtnners
while they are yet almost infants, be
cause the head OF the house canont earn
enough TO feed and clOthe his family.
Holds There Is Conspiracy.
The court is of the opinion that there
is testimony in this case that tends 20
ation-a combination of retail grocers In
this state doing business under methods
and in a manner that appears to result. /
at least In restraint Of trade, which is
unlawful: under the methods thus pur- !
sued il appears in the evidence in this !
case that prices are named, fixed ana /
maintained in numbers, as stated by de- !
PENDANTS counsel, on at least 200 articles /
classified as necessities of life; that such 4
prices are fixed without regard to the /
law of supply and demand, without re- /
gard to the cost of production or manu-
facture. and without regard to the cost /
OF exposing such articles 10 sale Such |
combination. with such purposes, or doing |
business in manner as to bring about
such results and such consequences, the |
law uniformly prohibits. because it is de-
clared TO be unlawful.
Not Justified.
In the pleas that counsel have made i
for the defendants in this case, I fear
that these defendants do not realize the |
results and consequences OF this cont
bination. ] have thought of ii since |
they do not know what they do 1t is
claimed and insisted that there is no
purpose of creating a monopoly, or put
ting exaggerated or unlawful prices on
the commodities they sell. or in any way
njuring the public The answer is is il /
simply for self protection that we are
engaged in this business, and we believe
hat a grocer ought 10 make a reason
able profit i'm doing business, and if gro
sers are allowed TO sell goods at I'M
prices the trade is ruined and
many of would have to go out of
business.
But when counsel says 10 the court |
hat il is to the interest of grOcerymen
o transact business in this manner, the !
,ourt, I'm its good conscience. cannot agree |,
With that conclusion. To be sure. the re-
'ults of the disturbance or breaking up
# this method of doing business in the
,ity OF Denver cannot TeOrga nize or regu-
ate the whole country, but if every com
nunity would establish such rules and
10 business on such planes and on such
'asis. the question would finally be dis
,osed Of
Unlawful and Wrong.
THE court cannot be blind to these
ana these results and these I
different classified men in business know
hey have organized the communities q
throughout the country and made these :
guileless grocerymen believe
hat 10 was TO their best interest to act
Is the agents to sell the goods of the .
at the manufacturers
rice. and have made them believe that l
was right But il is unlawful II Is