The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-03-19
ATTORNEYS FOR THE
TURPENTINE TRUST
ARGUE SHERMANACT
Claim Antitrust Act Un-
constitutional as Criminal
Law-Final Effort to
Set Aside Conviction

washington, March 1s.-Many explana-
tions were demanded today by members
OF the supreme court Of the United
States when attorneys for officers of tie
American Naval Stores company, the So
called "turpentine trust" started to
argue that the Sherman antitrust act
was unconstitutional as a criminal acr.
Samuel b. Adams of Savannah, Ga. rep
resenting the company, undertook to
reply, but finally concluded this feature
OF his argument by referring tho court
to his printed brief.
The argument marked the final effort
of the defendants to have set aside their
conviction In the Georgia federal courts
of violation of the Sherman antitrust
act. 1t was charged that they depressed
the market for turpentine and rosin to
such an extent that producers were COM
PEELED to sell at ridiculously low prices
Two Of the naval stores company's Off,
GERS, Spencer P. Shotter. chairman of the
board of directors, and J. T. Cooper
Myers, vice president, are the first men
sentenced to Imprisonment for violation
of the statute to como before the SUI
preme court. An attorney for officers Of
the so-called cash register trust" con-
victed recently, listened to the argument
today.
Never Passed Upon Law
Mr. Adams had hardly stated to the
court that the tribunal had never passed
upon the constitutionality of the law as
q penal act, when Chief Justice White
suggested it had never directly passed
upon the point, emphasizing the word
directly"
The attorney then explained that his
position was that the Sherman law in
prohibiting unreasonable restraint of
trade had provided no standard or cri-
terion by which acts might be measured,
and so was too indefinite to be good as a
criminal law. He contended this con-
struction of the law made it impossible
for a person to know whether he was
the statute until jury had ex-
ercised its whim as to whether the acts
were unreasonable
CAS- / remember it, within year or
so we decided a case in which we held
that reasonable was a sufficiently def-
mite standard" declared Justice Holmes.
Mr.. Adams suggested he had distin-
gushed that case from the one he was
arguing
'sDo you have the crime of manslaugh-
ter in Georgian asked Chief Justice
White. Define it."
Cites Former Law
Mr.. Adams hesitated. The chief justice
recalled an incident that hap
pened in New Orleans Just after a period
of military law, wherein a man shot an
other who was reaching for his snuff box
in his hip pocket. Now the jury found
that in that day 1t was reasonable to
suppose when a man reached to his pis-
toll pocket he meant to pull his pistol,
and so acquitted the accused on .he
ground of self-defense. The jury. de-
clared the act was reasonable. How do
you distinguish that case from this?"
Mr.. Adams suggested that the crime of
murder was matter of statute and
contented himself with referring to his
brief and beginning an attack upon the
fern Of the indictment.
Former Senator John C. Spooner for
the accused, and Assistant Attorney Cen
eral Fowler. for the government, will
address the court tomorrow