New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-03-31

Assuming that we have no right TO con
vict on any matter or act comnhtt.u IT,, ~
fore July g. 1906, when the statute Oh IN ,bc
itations prevailed does .b the loan aae TO remsin
on account Of repeated propositions
Segal that he had opportunities to raise
the money to pay the loan sno 49,
sufficient to prove restraint ol ""u''
On this question Judge Hand ruieu
that although the loan could have pee,
terminated and payment was not lor'e'
hv selling the collateral. If the defehu-
ants retained counsel over the company
until the loan was paid and the july
found this an act In restraint of trade
II would be enough to convict.
The Jury retired again, ana soon 'no
tension that had been created by Its APP
nearance gave way to a feeling or weary
waiting. There seemed to be no uouo'
| on either side defence or prosecutor
that the questions of the jury had us
| closed the inclination of the twelve men
10 consider the Segal loan transaction III
| itself as a violation of the Sherman act
All that remained to be decided II was
said. was whether the statute or lmita-
lions covered the period In which the
| government had been able to SHOW any
acts on the part of the defendants ind'-
eating an existence of the conspiracy
hetweep July and October. 1906.
At 6:15 o'clock the jury again sent
word to the judge. This time they asked
for any correspondence introduced III
evidence that passed between the oe-
PENDANTS during the critical period. MT
Wise produced the letters, but upon mo-
ton by Mr. Nicoll the Judge ordered tha'
all the correspondence be submitted 70
the fury. so that they might consider II
! In its entirety.
With the approach of the dinner hour
that again would interrupt the dellpera-
tons Of the jury for an hour, long
night vigil hove into view. Mr. Parsons
felt that the strain was too much Tor
him, and he was prevailed upon by his
son and his lawyers to go home ana
await there the verdict of the jury. Mr..
! Thomas Mr.. Bonner and Mr.. Frazier
remained.
The courtroom, which had been crowd
! ed during the morning session and the
| address of Judge Hand TO the jury
showed still fair sized crowd until inc
late hours Of the afternoon. Later, how
ever. there remained only three de-
| PENDANTS, the lawyers concerned In the
! case. and a number of officials OF the
sugar company and friends of the de-
| PENDANTS. and they hardly filled the in
| closure reserved in the courtroom Tor
those directly concerned in a trial.
| In his charge to the jury Judge Hand
described the allegations made In the
indictment, and then summarized the
accusations against the defendants as
| follows:
There Is nothing in the case, which VIII
| Justify YOU in any inference that the deI
PENDANTS here attempted to compel S esai
to extend the loan or that they lnIeri Ia 81 -
| with any Of his efforts to pay on the loan,
and as the government has made no PROOF
| of that you cannot consider II. 30 tne
| secretly induced Segal to take the loan not
| knowing that he was taking II from tne
| American sugar Refining, company, IN
tbromRh control Of the board Of directors
and through a control Of the malorlly
| stock, Intending to prevent any dlVld ds ~
being earned by Whlch tne iodii So ,ni &c
| naid and having acquired the controi 10
tpoaintsin that control until the company
| should become bankrupt or ne ruii ~.
| meanwhile the rennery itself raining lh'O
decay.
Judge Hand then discussed the main
outline of the facts that had been pre-
sented TO the jury during the long trial
He explained that the government mad
tried to show that the American Sugar
Refining Company controlled more tha'
70 per cent Of the sugar trade OF the
country. and though II failed 10 snow
that the corporation really controlled al
the output Of the refneries alleged TO DC
under its rule, II remained ana was o'
consequence that the company was III
control OF a very large portion OF the
| output.
As 70 the loan Of 81, $50, 900 to Adolph
| SegaL through which the American
Sugar Refining Company obtained ltH
control over the prospective competitor
Judge Hand reviewed the facts shown oy
the testimony. Segal had talked II
custav F. Kissel about his need Tor
ready money, and Kissel had mentioned
IN II. O. Havemeyer that he had man
u,ho soucht large loan. Havemeyer re-
fused at first 20 have anything TO do
with II. but later wrote TO klssei asking
&c tho man who wanted the money was
not Segal. BY that time Judge Hama sald
u.yemever was well informed of Segal
financial standing and knew everything
-. .ho reNnery built in Philadelphia
and Mr.. Thomas too, had been IN COM
nunication about it with his cousin
Stetson.
Concerning the question Of whether
| E;esaI 1ras the agent of the American
| sugar Refining Company or Whether NJ
uos tho agent of Segal, Judge Hand sale
his was really a question OF fact anc
Tor the Jury to decide. He acted Tor the
rcmnanv until September, 1906, th'
Judge said. and in every case ne acteo
AS the company wanted MN TO- anu hIs :,
sol as far as the loan was concerned
MIGHT he found TO have represented the
company 49,. A.. e,t,..
After explaining to the jury the Sher'
man act and the bearing OF It's PROV
sions upon this case, Judge Hand IN
ytructed .hem as TO the decision con
corning the statute Of limitations which
they must make in this case. II was
question Of fact. he said. and theretor'
belonging to the jury, whether the de
PENDANTS committed any act violating th'
law after July I. 1906, s any prior trans
action was barred from punishment pN
the statute Of limitations.
MR.. ALDRICH GOES ABROAD
Nelson W. Aldrich, former Senator from
To-