Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1915-03-14
RETRIAL FOR CASH REGISTER
Company Granted New Hearing by
United States Circuit Court
Of Appeals.
VIOLATED ANTITRUST LAW

CINCINNATI, o., March IS-Ths United
States circuit court Of appeals today re-
versed tho lower court in the case Of the
government against John II. Patterson.
president. and twenty-six other officials
OF former officials Of the National Cash
Register company Of DAYTON. O., and TO
msndcd II back TO the district court for a
new trial.
Mr.. Patterson and his associates were
found guilty OF violating the Sherman
antitrust law ana sentenced TO serve
prison terms and fined
The upper court based its action upon
its finding that the first count Of the in
dictment which charged the defendant
with being guilty OF conspiracy TO re-
strain trade in violation OF the Sherman
act, had not been proved by the evidence,
and that tho second and third were de-
fective and should have been permitted
to enter into the trial OF the case In the
lower court. II is held that conspiracy
had 20 be proved as existing within three
years OF tho time the Indictment was
drawn. and that the government failed
to offer convincing evidence TO sustain
these charges.
Courts Remarks.
Before the decision in the case OF the
United States against Kissel," the court
said, 'the question OF continuance OF q
conspiracy was in confusion and the
authorities In conflict Tho position there
combatted was that a conspiracy could
not have continuance in time.
1T was argued that Il could not be-
cause IL consisted in an unlawful agree
ment and a agreement does not have a
continuance. But this IL no longer an
accurate definition OF a conspiracy. 4
conspiracy Ia constituted by an agree
ment, II is true. but II Is the result of the
self. A conspiracy is a partnership in
criminal purposes.
There is no such thing a. q reasonable
conspiracy" the court declared.
The decision holds that the seconA
count IL detective because OF its uncer-
tainty. and that the third count " de-
fective because Il is insufficient and does
not charge an offense against the United
States. Both OF these counts charged
that the defendants had tried to monopo-
lie the cash register business in the
United States.
Actually doing business. no matter
how large, is not a monopoly" the court
stated.
should Have Asked Help.
The competitors who we're attacked
should have called upon the courts to
protect them while they were being at
| tackled"
The court held that District Judge Hol.
lister. the trial judge, had erred in moi
sustaining the demurTers TO the two last
counts when they we're raised by the at
torneys for the defense,
The deolsion laid stress upon tho fact
that the trial court had told the jury
that the defendants could not be found
guilty on the first count, charging con.
spiracy. unless they had conspired within
three years. 1t continued IN part:
But the defendants were entitled e
have the jury instructed specifically thai
they could not be found guilty as to tn,
icompetitors who ceased to exist befor,
1907. The defendants asked specific in
structions to this effect. These instruc
tons were given as to six OF them. They
should have been given as to the othel
twenty. That such instructions were
given as to six made It more prejudicia
that they were not given as TO the other
twenty"