The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-06-18
BENCH WARRANTS ISSUED
FOR THREE OTHER MEN


came out In the open today in Its at
tempt to prove that manipulating the
cotton market is against the law of the
country.
James A. Patten of Chicago and seven
lesser figures in the speculative field have
been indicted, charged with conspiracy
in restraint of trade under the Sherman
ANTITRUST law. The Indictment was re-
turned by special federal grand jury
late this afternoon and handed up be-
fore Judge Hough in the United States
circuit court.
Five of the indicted-Patten, Eugene B
Scales, Frank B. Hayne, William p.
Brown and NJ. H. Rothschild-gave bail
of $4,000 each. as required, through coun-
sci.
For the other three who were neither
present In court nor represented by law
yers bench warrants were issued. They
are S. J. Herman, Robert M. Thompson
and Charles A. Kittlo-
Immediately after the indictment was
announced there was an excited break
on the New York cotton exchange, July
and August deliveries declining about
81 so a bale, July selling at 14.S1c and
August at 1850, as against 15.12c and
i464c at the close of the business OF
the previous night. The bull leaders ap-
peared to be in no wise disturbed by the
governments action and by their buy
ing orders helped to rally prices during
the last few minutes, July closing at
IA )2c and August at IA ACC bid or about
II to IA points up from the low levels
of the day.
Five counts are embraced in the in
dictments, which is In blanket form, and
contains 10000 words. The first count
charges that the defendants unlawfully
did conspire with certain corporations
not herein indicted to -demand arbitrary
excessive and monopolistic prices for cot
tom
The CO-ConspiratOrs
The firms mentioned as co-conspirators
though not included in the Indictment
are the Alabama district. Avondale Mills
Birmingham: Central Mills Sylacauga
Enterprise Mills. Enterprise; MontgomerS
district, Montgomery Cotton Mills, Mont
romery: Prattville Cotton Mills, Pratt
yille Georgia district, Anchor Duck Mills
Rome. Ca; Canton Cotton Mills, Canton
Ga; Elm City Cotton Mills. LAGRANGE
Ca; Exposition Cotton Mills, Atlanta
Flood Cotton Mills, Rome; Granville
Hosiery Mills, Grantville Habersham
Mills. Habersham; Lawrenceville Manu-
featuring company Lawrenceville; Lois
Cotton Mills, Douglassville; Milstear
Manufacturing company, Milstead; New
nan Cotton Mills, Newman, Ga; Ross-
vile Manufacturing company, Rossville
Ga: Sybley Manufacturing company, Au-
gusta Scotdale Mills, Atlanta; iryof
Manufacturing company, Tryon, ga.
IInitv Cotton Mills, LAGRANGE, Ga. In the
North Carolina district, Cannon Manu-
featuring company, Concord; Henrltts
Mills. Caroleen; Mecklenburgh Manufact'
uring company, Charlotte.
South Carolina: Aiken Manufacturing
company, Bath; Bolton mills, Belton
Brandon mills, Greenville Capltai Si.s
mills. Columbia; Easey Cotton mill, Eas
lev: Glenn Lowery Manufacturing com
pauy. Whitmore; CRANKY Cotton mills
Columbia: Greenwood Cotton mills
Greenwood; Grendal mills, Greenwood
jackson mills, Iva; Lancaster COTTON
mills, Lancaster; Langley Manufacturint
company, Langley; Monaghan mills
Greenville; Ninety-Six Cotton mills
Greenwood; Olympia Cotton mills, Colum
bia; Ottaray mills, Union; Pelzer Man
ufaeturing company, Pelzer; Piedmon
Manufacturing company, Piedmont; Rich
land Cotton mills, Columbia; Riverside
Manufacturing company, Anderson; Sax
on mills, Spartanburg; Seminole Manu-
featuring company, Clearwater; Toxawa,
n.ills, Anderson; Union Buffalo Mills com
pany, Union; Williamson mills, William
ston; Woodruff Cotton mills. Woodruff
WoodsIce Cotton mills. Greenville.
inside workings
Describing tn, inside workings of tn
alleged conspiracy the indictment say
That the conspirators were to become
members of and engage in an unlawful
combination in the form of an agreemen
under which they were severaily to pLi'
chase for shipment from the south u
New York all &C tton not directly absoroet
by the demands of foreign and domesti
spinners In the ordinary course OF busi
ness in other words, as much as the.
could purchase from day to day withoa
seriously enhancing the price, but never
theltse to such an extent that togethe
they would long before the end of lin
crop year, have so much cotton In thei
pcssess'on in The city of New York tina
they could. by reason of the abnorma
condition thus produced in said trade an
commerce, severally demand arbitrary
excessive and monopolistic prices
None of the "conspirators," continued
the Indictment. was able to finance TIL
deal individually. thus proving from tn
governments logic that none Of the de
PENDANTS was expected to be a spinner o
manufacturer aru hau no use LOT sue
cotton other than to sell it..
There is appended to the indictmen
what purports to be an agreement be
tween Brown & Hayes, as parties of tn
first part, and certain spinners. as partie
OF the second part. through the medium
Of which 1t is alleged cotton was illegall
cornered. The contract, signed in New
York OH February 26, 1910, and amende
on March z, 1910, says among othe
things
Alleged Agreement
"The said parties of the second par
hereby subscribe for and authorize tn
parties of the first part to buy for thei
eccount contracts on the New York cot
ton exchange for the future delivery o
the number of bales set opposite their re
epactive names. Said cotton to be pur
chased for delivery in the months o
March. April. May. June or July, 1910, o
divided among two or more of thos
months in the discretion of the partie
Of the first part and the committee here
matter set out.
THE said parties of the first part sub
scribe for, on their own account and sue