The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-06-21
PROCEEDINGS FILED
AGAINST PACKERS
Five Companies Sued in Mis-
souri, Supreme Court
CUSTER rs DEMANDED
Attorney General of Missouri Asks
That the Corporations Licenses Be
Forfeited and They BE De-
MED Corporate Rights

torney General Elliott Major began
custer proceedings against five meat
pa cking companies today by fling quo
warranto informations in the supreme
court. The companies attached are Ar
mour Packing company. Morris & Co..
Swift & Co.. Hammond Packing COM
pany and st. Louis Dressed Beef and
Provision company.
The Armour, Swift and Morris COM
panies are charged with violating the
antitrust law and conspiracy. and the
Hammond and st. Louis Dressed Beef
and Provision company as subsidiary
companies of the National Packing
company with conspiracy to control the
business In Missouri.
The five companies are named in two
petitions which ask that the corpor-
ations be excluded from all corporate
rights; that their licenses be forfeited
and that all or such portion of tn cir
property as the court may deem proper
be conf1scated, or in lieu thereof fine
to be imposed
Armour. Swift and Morris are charged
with having entered into conspiracy
in 1903 to control the prices to be
paid by dealers in live stock, poultry,
butter, eggs. dairy and agricultural
paid by retail and wholesale dealers
for dressed meats, and to control the
prices to be paid by all retail and
wholesale dealers for butter, eggs, poul-
try, game, dairy and agricultural prod
ucts and byproducts from the bust
ness of slaughtering live stock
The second count of the petition
charges that the three packing COM
panies conspired to restrain trade and
DESTROY cOlnnatitinp In
sale of meat products. live stock. po,,l-
Try, butter and eggs by fixing price
10 De paid by all members OF the al
leged agreement, and conspiring to
control the business of buying. selling
and dealing in packing house products.
Inc alleged absorption of the Hammond
ana 81. Louis Dressed Beef Provision
companies by the National Packing com
pany Is said In the petition of the attor-
ney general to have taken place in SEN
tember, 1902. The Hammond and st. Io,iis
companies are charged with having en-
tered into an unlawful agreement with
others engaged in meat packing for
the purpose of restricting competition and
TO prevent lawful trade.
Inc National Packing company. the in
formation filed In the court today alleges
was chartered in New Jersey In 1902 with
a capital stock of s15,000,0O0 to engage in
meat packing and selling and to hold
stock OF any other corporation
Inc National Packing company the De-
ution says, was not organized in good
iaith Tor the purpose of engaging In the
business authorized by its charter. but
as corporate scheme to effect an unIaw-
Iul trust among the Hammond and St
Louis Dressed Beef and Provision COM
panies and numerous other corporations
individuals and partnerships engaged in
the same business in Missouri and
throughout the United States with a view
to lessen, restrict, limit and destroy trade
and competition In the purchase and sale
OF all packing house products in which
the Hammond and st. Louis and other
companies We're dealing and for fixing the
prices and for limiting the amount and
quantity of packing house products sold
and offered for sale in Missouri and
throughout the United States"
III Is charged In the petition that the Ma
tlonal Packing company obtained control
of the Hammond and st. Louis companies
which had previously been engaged In
Missouri as legitimate competitors and
that the National has ever since voted
the stocks of the companies, collected the
dividends and used the companies in
1urtherance of the alleged unlawful trust.
The Hammond and st. Louis companies.
through the National Packing company,
the attorney general charges, have be-
come members of the alleged trust and
have been guilty of abuse of privileges not
granted to them by Missouri.
Bor president Of city council, Jones 255
Aldermen, Carter 173, Collins los, Foley
92
Committeeman, Layton 14o, McGlogh-
lin 1877.
FIFTEENTH WARD-WEST END
For commission government, 2u.
against commission government, ia
For mayor, Exun 152. King IS, Monks
4. Seals So.
For recorder. Feagin 100. Handy 81, Ma
bers AZ.
For city attorney. Boyd 1877, Martin IS,
Thach So.
For city treasurer and tax collector.
Copeland 2o2, Eustis 105.
For city auditor, Peterson 257.
For city engineer, Nicholson 152, Truss
143
For plumbing inspector. Eckerle 255,
Gayle co.
For city electrician, Alternately 20, Dan
forth 20. Flanagan %.
For building inspector. Cooper 81, Gull
pepper IA. Golsan g. Mathews 14s, Robert
son IA.
For street commissioner, Bridges Q.
Brown 81, Gafford A, Harrington IS, HUH
stuttler 5S, Keeling 81, Perkerson II, Prize
gel As, Smms 8.
For license inspector. Baker Z, Boggan
"a. Cole 8. Courson II, Hudson IL. Plosser
123. Savage 9. Stokes 70, Withers 49,
For police commissioner, Drake 49, Hy-
dinger 49, Moore II, Epurgeon 53
For chief of police. Bodeker 1856, Shirley
| 49,
Aldermen. Smith 1863. Tharpe 16s, WILL
liams POP.
FIFTEENTH WARD-ELYTON
| Commission government, yes 1874. no II
For mayor. Exum 1873. King &c. Monks
| 10, Seals 40.
For recorder. Feagin 1S, Handy es. Ma
bers 80.
For city attorney. Boyd 1as. Martin 81
Thach 80.
| For city treasurer and tax collector
Copeland 1855, Eustis "a.
| For city auditor, Peterson 1893.
For city engineer, Nicholson 1914 Truss
1871.
For plumbing inspector, Eckerle 17s
Gayle 60.
For city electrician, Alternately 1857, Dan
forth 10. Flanagan 50.
For building inspector, Cooper 43. Col
san 9, Mathews 123, Robertson 30.
For street commissioner, Bridges 5
stuttler 49, Keeling Is, Perkerson 2, Prize
gel 80, Smms 7.
| For license inspector, Baker 8. Boggai
46, Cole 10. Courson IA, Hudson s, Plosse
IA, Savage T. Stokes 62, Withers 10.
For police commissioner, Drake So, Hy
dinger IL. Moore 81, Spurgeon "a.
| For chief of police, Bodeker 131, Shirle,