The daily banner. (Cambridge, Md.) 1897-2008, 1911-06-23
POWDER TRUST
MUST DISSOLVE
U. S, Circuit Court Hands
Down Decision.
VIOLATES SHERMAN LAW
The Dupont Company and Twenty
seven Allies Declared to Be illegal
Combination In Restraint of Trade.

Wilmington, Del. June 22.-Judges
Gray, of Wilmington; Burlington, or
Pittsburg, and Lanning, OF Trenton,
N. J., filed an opinion in the United
States circuit court here. declaring
the Dupont Powder company and
twenty-seven other companies and In
dividuaIs to be guilty of maintaining
a combination in restraint of interstate
commerce in powder and other emplo,
sives," and ordered that it be dis
solved.
The bills against United States Sen
ator Henry A. Dupont and fourteen
other defendants were dismissed. This
is the celebrated suit of the govern
ment against the powder trust for al,
legged violation of the Sherman anti
trust act.
The court has fixed Oct. 16 as the
date for hearing arguments as to how
the combination shall be dissolved.
In his decision Judge Lanning de-
cides that a number of companies
forming the combination have com
mitted certain acts which make il IL
legal and in violation of the Sherman
antitrust law.
Judge Lanning heard the case, with
Judge Gray and Judge Burlington. III e
trial was held in Wilmington, but the
Philadelphia witnesses, for their con-
venience, presented their ties -iInony
before a commissioner who sat in that
city.
Judge Lanning was delegated to
write the courts opinion.
The decision, following closely upon
those of the supreme court in tie to-
bacco and Standard Oil cases, is re-
garded as a great victory for the gov
eminent. The trial of the powder case,
begun in Wilmington in 1907, attracted
widespread attention. Hearings before
United States commissioners were
held in half a dozen cities and great
mass of testimony was taken.
William A. Glasgow, of Philadelphia,
and James Scarlet, of Danville, Pa,
appeared as special counsel for the
government. William H. Button was
of counsel for the defense.
1t was alleged by the government
that from 1872, when the Dupont con-
Germ and other subsidiary companies
formed an association for controlling
| the powder industry, until 1907, when
the suit was brought, the so-called
trust gained a monopoly of the trade.
1t was also declared that the com
| bination" fixed prices and otherwise
acted in restraint of trade. All these
charges were denied by the company,
through it's chief counsel, former Sen
ator Spooner, of Wisconsin, who made
the chief argument for the Dupont
and its allied companies, whose num-
Der was fixed at sixteen by the fed
eral government.
| The defendants we're the E. I. Du'
pont de Nemours Powder company and
sixteen associated companies.
A final decree is entered with re,
spect to fifteen of the defendants in
| that the petition filed by the govern,
| ment against them asking that they be
| adjudged acting in restraint of trade,
| is dismissed, these defendants being
| the Aetna Powder company, Miami
Powder company, American Powder
| mills, Equitable Powder Manufacture
| ing company, Austin Powder company,
| Anthony Powder company, King Pow
der company, limited; American E. c.
, and Schultze Gunpowder company,
Peyton Chemical company, Henry A.
Dupont, Henry F. Baldwin, California
Powder works, Conemaugh Powder
company, Metropolitan Powder COM
pany and E. |. Dupont company, OF
Aug. l, 1903.
The opinion holds that the remain
| ing twenty-seven defendants are main
tanning a combination in restraint of
| interstate commerce in powder and
| other explosives in violation of sec
| ton / of the act entitled,
"An act to protect trade and com
| merce against unlawful restraints and
| ponopolies" approved July 2, 1890;