The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1909-11-20
Verdict in the Sharp Case"
Set Aside by Judge Walter
H. Sanborn in United States
Circuit Court of Appeals.
SHERMAN ANTITRUST
ACT WAS NOT VIOLATED
Coal Company Not Prohibited
From Selecting Its Custom
erS, From Refusing to Sell
Product or Fixing Prices,
OPINION AS HANDED DOWN

st. Paul, Mimi. Nov. 19.-Judge
Walter H Sanborn in the United
States circuit court of appeals today
handed down an opinion setting aside
the verdict and ordering a new trial
in the case of the United States
against the Union Pacific Coal COM
pany, the Union Pacific railway,
the Oregon Short Line railway, James
NJ. Moore and Everett Buckingham,
In which they are charged with vio-
lating the Sherman antitrust law by
forming an unlawful combination.
While the suit was brought in the name
of the United States, proceedings were
started by Salt Lake City coal dealer
named Sharp. who charged the coal com
pany and the defendant railways with re-
fusing to sell and haul coal for him.
Sharp charged that the Union Pacific
Coal company refused to sell him coal.
and that the railways refused to haul the
commodity because he advertised and sold
coal az a less figure than his competitors.
Judge SanbOrn in his opinion. holds
that there was no substantial evidence Ot
any combination between any two of the
defendants, either to refuse to sell coal
10 Sharp, OF to refuse TO transport it for
him
The lower court found the defendants
guilty Of violation of the Sherman anti
trust law and imposed a fine of $1,000 and
costs on Buckingham and $1,000 and costs
on the other defendants.
Text of the Opinion.
The opinion OF the circuit court of APP
peals is contained in the syllabus as fol-
lows:
..The test of an unlawful combination
Z nfaT II ErfiK fc - noe
/ sary effect upon free competition in eom-
merce among the states or with foreign
nations
"A combination. the necessity of which
is TO stfle, OF directly and substantially
TO restrict. such competition is unlawful
undec that act, but IL the necessary ef-
fect OF combination IS but ineidentaliy
and Indirectly TO restrict competition
willie its chief result is to foster the trade
and increase the business of those who
make and operate it, it does not fall under
the ban of this law
"A coal company engaged in mining and
selling its coal is not prohibited by the
antitrust act, or by the law. from refus-
ing to sell its coal. from selecting its Gus
toners, from fixing the price and terms
on which II will sell It's product, or from
selling to different persons and on diff
ferent terms
Stockholders Not Liable.
~ violation of d law by a corporation
does not render its non-psTtieipating
HlDtknOiUEiS GIlIllndliA IdDiG lntEtlOi-
"Unless there is substantial evidence of
facts which exclude every other hypOthe-
sis but that of guilt il is the duty of the
trial court to instruct the jury TO return
verdict for the accused.
And where all the substantial evidence
is as consistent with innocence as with
guilt, it is the duty of the appellate court
TO reverse a Judgment of conviction
In conclusion the court says;
There was no substantial evidence oi
any combination between any two of the
defendants. either TO refuse to sell coal
TO Sharp or to refuse 10 transport il for
him.
"A combination between a corporation
and its officers OF agents, in violation OF
the antitrust act cannot be formed by
the thoughts or acts of the officer OF
agent alone without the conscious partic=
ipatiOn in IS Of any other officer or agent
OF the corporation.
THE union of two or more persons. the
conscious participation Of two or more
minds, Is indispensable to an unlawful
combination"
The action in which a reversal of the
decision of the Utah court was secured
was known as the SHARP case" the
charge being that of conspiracy and re-
straint of trade. for putting out of bust
ness David J. Sharp who formerly CON
Quoted coal business in Upper Main
street Sharp advertised to sell coal at
5-cent reduction and ii YES alleged
that conspiracy followed. by which he
was prevented from getting any coal
The case resulted in the imposition of a
fine of $1,000 on Everett Buckingham and
5000 each James NJ. Moore. the Union
Pacific railway. the Union Pacific Coal
company and the Oregon Short Line Coal
company
The decision i'm the court of this state
was given about year ago.