Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-12-22

United States District Judge Carpen-
ter overruled the motion of the de-
PENDANTS to strike out counts and )
of the indictment.
The court also ruled adversely on
the motion To have the jury instruct
cd to disregard the allega tons of gov
eminent counsel in the opening state
ment regarding the absorption Of the
SchwarZchild d SulZerberger Co. and
the New York Butchers Dressed Meat
Co. by the alleged packers eombina-
ton. The count gave the ruling at the
opening of the session.
In denying the motion of the defence
Judge Carpenter said:
THE existence of and the use claim
ed to have been made of the National
Packing Co. are merely evidentiary
circumstances possibly bearing upon
the creation or continuance of the al
legged unlawful combination.
Summed M the argument of the
defendants counsel is not that the
opening statement Of the government
was too narrow, but too broad. Be
cause the district attorney outlined
certain evidentiary facts the govern
ment is not precluded from proving
others"
ON the second motion Judge Carpen-
ter said: ISL
TT is also urged that evidence of
the purchase by the defendant Tilden
fof certain shares of the capital stock
OF Sehwarzschild < Suzberger and
of the New York Butchers Dressed
Meat Co should be excluded 1t was
iHffietnlptTf
should charge how the prosecution
proposed to prove its case. 1t is quite
proper. however, that the opening
statement should not only cover the
ultimate facts, but advise the jury III
some measure Of the character, force
and value of the proof which IS to be
offered
THE motion IS denied and exceptions
noted IN behalf Of all the defendants
Attorneys for the packers decided to
make an opening statement before wit
nesses We're called to the stand and
Attorney George T. Blu, bingham began
the first address to the jury in behalf
of the defendants.
In his opening statement. Attorney
buckingham called attention to the
charge in the indictment which accus-
ed the defendant packers OF forming
a combination in restraint of trade be-
etween the years 1907 and 1910.
He said that the supreme court of
the United States had construed re
straint OF trade" as meaning only those
restrictions which were "undue and
unreasonable
He asserted that the defence would
prove by evidence that it had not ex-
acted enormous profits at the expense
ofthe producer and the consumer. and
denied that the packers controlled or
fixed either the purchase price Of cat
tie or the sale price of fresh meats.
lie said further:
s.'Phe indictment covers only the pc
lricd from September, 1907, to Septem-
ber 1910, and the combination must be
proved within that time"
He said that fresh meats We're sold
in direct competition with hundreds
of competitors He added
we will show that the defendants
ysrhe best business methods ana the
greatssts economies, have in fact earn
ed fexS3( han 10 per cent. per yesbg On
their.Setual money investment. ~ =
wflf sk,oQs..tEsas the public kAas not SUI :
lfered aisAsssfnry, buc. ms sfeaped q
great benefit BY the etuHhess opera
TONS of the defendants" :
Mr.. Buckingham addressed the jury
as the representative of four of the
defendant packers, Louis E., Edward
and Charles II. Swift and Francis Al
Fowler.
lie added
eve DENY the charge that thu di-,
rsctors Of the National Packing Co
made any agreements about any bust
ness, except that of the Nationals
The other trade arrangement
whose object was to prevent the. oyeS
accumulation of meats as peris h8hlle
articles in the various markets was
ended BY agreement, prior To Jupe,'
1902. The Indictment charges .thAt TIE
National Packing Co. was 'organized
for the purpose of protecting this old
arrangement. This is emphatically de-
, MED. :