New-York tribune., 1911-11-16
IS NOT A POSITIVE LAW
Contention of Meat Packers
Against the Sherman Act.
CASE FOR SUPREME COURT
Attorneys Say Decision Will Be
of Great Interest to All
Business Combinations.

Chicago. Nov. 15.-Attorneys for the IN
dicted meat packers were busy to-day pre-
pairing for the next move In their latest
action to obtain a ruling by the uhlteu
States Supreme Court on the validity OF
the Sherman antitrust law which they
contend is not now n positive law, because
the reasonable restraint ruling makes II
impossible to determine petorehahu
whether an act is legal.
The hearing on the habeas corpus Wits
granted yesterday by United States circuit
Judge c. G. Kohlsaat, will come up To-
morrow Whichever way he decides. the
case will at once be appealed to the United
States Supreme Court. ii is said.
Meantime, the criminal cases against the
ten packers will be halted, because the case
is now out OF the jurisdiction of federal
Judge Carpenter, the packers having sur
rendered themselves in Judge hohisaat ;
court yesterday.
Attorneys who to-day studied the leea'
phases OF the latest action OF the packer .
tonight said that the decision OF the Su-
preme Court in the present case Wouin
probably be of great interest to all business
combinations in the country.
The main contention raised by the pack
ers is this When the Supreme court heiu
that the reasonableness Of the restraint OF
trade must be determined in each mol
vidual case the packers contend the ilsh
court nulnfed the Sherman act, because
they say. il took from the citizen or cor
pora:ion the power Of knowing Whether
what he did was criminal before his case
had been passed on by court ana jury
and that precedent was Of no value since
the ''whms. prejudices or judgments oi
| juries might differ.
This question could not be raised Dy the
attorneys for the tobacco or the OIL COM
many. because it was in those cases that
the reasonable restraint OF trade RUE
was laid down.
Now that the Sherman act, according 10
the attorneys of the packers, mas peeh
made indefinite, they question the worth
of the law They say they want decisloi'
nv the highest tribunal before proceeuihs
further They contend that the real Vaiue
Of the law must be decided as result Vi
the present proceeding A..
If such a decision can be oo'ai''eu' '','
attorneys say, the ruling VIII nave an
feet on all corporations that nave oee"
may he prosecuted under the Sheri'lan az
While convicted officers OF the NaVal Stol's
Comnanv have their case up for reVie" pS
tho surreme Court. II is said that 'he"
emit docs not exactly resemble the pacherh
case THE Naval Stores review IL Is sd'o'
will not get the attention OF the supreme
Court for some time.
The present case. however, attorneys s"''
will receive attention soon. ana the rui'"s'
u &c contended by the packers, VIII proo-
ahI,, eettIe the exact status of The sherman
Iaw as modified by tho Supreme Court
ming that unreasonable restraint must
be shown.
Ar1,one the concerns that may nc ahect'u
arc the various lumber corporations 'he
United states steel Corporation. TIE inter-
national Harvester Company, the American
sugar Refining Company, the Naval stores
Corpanv. the American Tobacco Company
ard the Standard Oil Company.
81 Louis Nov 15.-William Jennings
Rrvan saws that it will be interesting TO
see how the Supreme Court Of the United
statos deals with the present action oi
counsel for the Chicago packers. MI
BRYAN tonight said:
on account of the defendants appealing
IN tho habpas corpus act. the question
rises as tn whether tho Standard OH ana
the Tobacco decisions weaken or slTehe'heh
the law. " It. ,,,, lon,