The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1911-09-15
Big Cases on the Docket Of the
Federal Supreme Court.

A recent dispatch from Washington,
D. c.. says: More light on the applica-
ton of the Sherman antitrust law to the
business of the day is expected from
the Federal Supreme Court shortly after
the opening of its session next month.
Several "anti-trust cases." advanced
for consideration by the tribunal, are
being relied upon to give the Court
greater opportunity than that afforded in
the recent Standard Old and Tobacco
decisions to interpret law and to impress
upon the country how the Court pro-
posed that the law should be enforced.
1t is planned by the court in the first
month of its ressions to hear arguments
in the SO called "hard coal case" the
cotton corner case" and the 'Saint
F, Louis Bridge Case" Possibly later, the
, court may consider, the so-called "Tur-
pentine Trust Case" Each involves
knotty problems growing out OF the
attempts of the government to punish
alleged violations of the Sherman Anti
| Trust Law. With the exception Of the
so called "Turpentine Case" the gov
ernmeht has been defeated in the lower
court and has appealed to the Supreme
Court to uphold its Interpretation Of the
law.
The hard coal case, constitutes a gov
eminent attack on the principal anthra-
cite coal carrying railroads and the coal
| owning companies in Pennsylvania. 1t IS
claimed that since 1895, these companies
have been parties to combination and
a conspiracy with the general object of
ending competition among themselves
in the transportation and sale OF anthra-
cite coal and of preventing the sale OF
the independent output in competition
with their own, designing thereby to
secure TO themselves virtual monopoly
Besides this general conspiracy alleged,
a number of small conspiracies, not only
forming part of the general conspiracy,
but occupying an independent existence,
have been charged by the government.
All of the charges were overrued by
the lower court, the United States Cir
cult Court for Eastern Pennsylvania,
except that concerning one OF the SO
called little combinations, the Temple
Iron Company. In that instance the in
junction was granted.
Nothing like the cotton corner CASE
has ever been before the Supreme Court,
it is said. The government will ask the
court to override the action of the United
States Circuit Court tor Southern New
York. in striking out Of an indictment
against James A. Patton, Eugene G.
Sales, Frank B. Hayne and William P.
Brown, three counts. These counts
charged in substance that these men con-
spired to monopolize the Interstate
trade and commerce in available cotton
by acquiring enough of that commodity
on the New York Cotton Exchange to
give the alleged conspirators power to
fix arbitrary and excessive prices. 1t was
charged that they knew the natural result
of running corner" would be to OBJ.
struct the cotton trade and to injure bona
hde spinners and manufacturers by
compelling them. in buying cotton, &c
compete with "short" sellers who would
be purchasing under abnormal conditions
produced by the corner" The lowel
court held that the restraint of the
trade of the spinner and the manufact
urer was remote and indirect and the
operation of running a corner" on
the market was not a violation of the
Sherman Antitrust law.
In the Saint Louis Bridge Case, "
the government claims that the agree
ments whereby the Terminal Railroad
Association of Saint Louis acquired the
ownership and control and operates the
lads Bridge" and the Merchants
Bridge" across the Mississippi River
violate the Sherman Antitrust law
The United States Circuit Court fol
Eastern Missouri dismissed the bill.
The so called "Turpentine Trust Case, ;
involves the validity of the indictment
and conviction of head officials of the
American Naval Stores Company on the
charge of having violated the Sherman
Antitrust law. Last spring the cour
declined TO advance the case for early
hearing, but 1t is barely possible that i
may do SO at this session.