New-York tribune., 1919-01-17

purchase the so-called Hearst papers,
they are not engaged in an unlawful
combination or conspiracy, but are ac
tuated only by a desire to take all
lawful steps to protect themselves in
the conduct of their own business. In
other words, they contend, as was said
in Collins VS.. American News Company,
81 App. Div, 260, at 1858:
"The defendants seek not to iniure
the plaintiff, but to protect themselves.
mo advantage, at all commensurate
with the labor involved, could be de-
rived from a review in this opinion of
the very numerous authorities cited by
the defendants upon their briefs and
which they claim support their conten-
tions.
"The facts in the case as established
upon the present state of the record
can hardly be said to be in dispute
conspiracy on the part of the defend
ants to use the tremendous force of
their united power to compel the plain
tiff to regulate his business under the
direction of the defendants at the
hazard of deprivng him of the sup
plies upon which his business de-
pends, and thus to prevent him from
competing with such other newsdeal-
ers as would transact and carry on
their business under the conditions
which the defendants should choose to
prescribe. In this lies the essence of
the case against the defendants. This
joint action is in the highest degree
arbitrary, coercive and un-Amercan.
For the purpose of this motion, | am
constrained to hold it to be prima facie
and illegal invasion of the rights of the
plaintiff. Other facts may, it is true,
develop upon the trial which will re-
qulre a different conclusion, but the
present duty of the Court is plain.
Court Grants Motion
Upon an application for the contin-
uance of preliminary injunction, it is
not necessary that a case should be
made out that would entitle the COM
plainant to relief at all events on the
final hearing. If the complainant
have made out n prima faeie case, or f
from the pleadngs and the affidavits
1T appears to the Court that a case is
presented proper for it's investigation
on final hearing, a preliminary in
junction may issue to maintain the
status quo.
at seems to the Court that if the
temporary injunctions shall not be
granted, and if the preliminary in
Junction contained in the order to show
cause dissolved, this plaintiff would.
action, be deprived of the opportunity
of offering for sale the morning and
evening newspapers published in the
City of New York, and his business
would suffer very material injury, if
it would not be utterly ruined. No
rights of any of the defendants, except
the Star Company, can be affected by
the granting of the motion. On the
contrary, if it shall be granted, the
other defendants will be assured of at
least one customer for their publica-
tions of whom they would, by their
own combined acts, be deprived should
the motion not be granted. The de-
fendant Star Company would not suf-
fer because the plaintiff now refuses
and, since last August, has refused to
purchase its publications.
The motion will therefore be grant
ed with costs, and the injunction pen
dente lite prayed for will be issued"
i am no disrespecter of judicial au-
thority, but have found from a some
what extended experience that indus
trious and clever counsel are usually