The Cairo bulletin., 1911-01-05
y. S. SUPREME COURT 70 DECIDE
IF MANUFACTURERS MAY
MAKE PRICES.
INJUNCTION WAS DENIED.
BY Lower CoNft---Piaintiff contcnded
That Retailer Was Merely An
Agents arguments fieard
Yesterday.

WasbingtonI Jan. Ado contrasts
to prevent ttckt rates" IN proprietary
medicines vihiate the sherman anti
trust law ofethe common law In re:
straint of trade.
That question was argued today be-
fore the supreme court Of the United
States. Upon the decision Of ths
court is said to depend the continua.
ton of "cut rates. in proprietary
medicines In the United States. il
probably will be several weeks before
the court will announce It's decision
The question was brought before
the court by the DR.. Mes Medica
Company, of Elkhart, indiana. A few
years ago, that company entered into
certain contracts with dealers In
medicines throughout the country
These were not contracts Of sale, 70
the company pow contends, but con
tracts of consignment, under which
the dealers did not become the own
ers of the medicines, but did become
agents Of the company, One OF the
conditions OF the contracts was tina
the dealers should sell only to certain
persons and at certain prices.
John ID Park and Sons Company
OF Cincinnati, Ohio, did not enter IN
70 contract with the Or. Miles.
Medical Company, but the latte
charges the Cincinnati firm Wits Id
duclng others who did make sucl1
contracts to break the conditions con
corning persons and price. The manu-.
featuring company went into the
courts asking for an injunctlo
against the Cincinnati firm to pre-
vent 1t from procuring contract viola
lions and from selling the medicine at
I1ld rates.
Justice Lurton, then on the circuit
bench, announced the opinion OF tn
United States circuit couf, Of appeals
for the sixth circuit, in which the IL
junction requested by the manufac
tnrer was denied. The case was ap
pealed To the supreme court, and
Frank r Reed and Edward =, Rogers
presented brief in support of the
position taken by the DR.. Miles Medi.
cal Company. Alton u. Parker AMI
William J. SHREDDER filed brief for
the John d. Park and Sons Company
In the brief for the manufactured
1t was urged that the lower cour
had erred in holding that even IL tn
contracts were construed as contract
Of consignment or agency that they
were void because in restraint Of
trade, both at common law and unde
the Sherman antitrust law
In the first place 1t was argued In
the brief that contracts bet seen a
principal and an agent were not "A
restraint of trade, whatever condi
tions were include In the contracts
Furthermore, it was contended tina.
the medicines embodied trade secret
and from the very nature Of the er
ticles the owner OF the secrets was
entitled to monopoly therein.
In the brief prepared by Mr.. Par
ker and Mr. Schroeder It was argued
that the courts could not insure an
unnecessary monopoly In proprietary
medicines 1t was argued that TIE
manufacturer was asking for a protec.
ton granted only to patented articles
without subscribing to the condition
imposed upon patented articles, name
~ that they will become available to
the public after few years. Exten l.
cd arguments were presented in the
brief to show that the contracts VIC.
lated the common law and the Shsr-
man act.