New-York tribune., 1919-01-25

Commissioner could decide what newspapers
should be sold he could prescribe what
brands of cigars or what candies should be
sold on such premises; that he could deter
mine the daily menu of the restaurants in
parks conducted under the privilege of
licenses. The court decided against me- say.
ing, IN effect, that the city was entitled to
obtain the best price it could for these priv
lleges and also entitled to prescribe the
public service that the licensee should rem
der.
Williamson maintained his stand until
December 81, the date on which his license
expired, and Mr.. Harmon, the Park Com
missioner although he has not yet renewed
Wllliamson's licenses has not yet granted
them to any one else. Williamson is still
conducting the business of his own stand
and his soldier brothers. How long this
Will continue it is l cannot say
brought third case that of news
dealer, Sultan who not public licensee
and who conducted his business in his own
store. My complaint alleged conspiracy
IN restraint of trade against the Publishers
the Hearst papers particularly All the
facts that apply to the Sultan case apply to
the Williamson case. The only distinction
is that Williamson did business under
license and subject, as the court held.
10 the terms OF the license, notwithstanding
that the municipality in enforcing those
terms might still be promoting the purposes
OF an illegal combination. In the Sultan
case | obtained an injunction, which, upon
full argument has been continued Dendente
hte-that is, until it is fully tried out-and
l lnclose to you herewith clear report of
the courts decision. In effect, it held that
Williamson and Sultan and other newsdeal-
ers who refused to sell the Hearst papers
tor patriotic or other reasons, were the vic
TINS in TIE conduct of their business of an
unlawful conspiracy and combination In
Wllliamson's case, he being a public licen-
see and obliged to do business under the
terms of his license, the court could protect
him no further than to the end of the term
of his existing license, and the court could
not prevent the municipality from making
general provisions to the public service
that should be required Of its licensees. In
the Sultan case, Sultan not being public
licensee, but newsdealer doing business
in his own store, the court held that it
could and should protect him against this
unlawful conspiracy
am unable to pursue the Williamson
case because he was protected to the end
OF his term and now he has nothing to nro
tect. tie is now without a license. and con-
tinues IN his business by the grace Of the
Park commissioner, who. am bound to saw
is acting the part of man who is unwillinp
to do an injustice
AS TO the Sultan case. YOU viii SEQ from
the inclosed copy of Judge Benedict's de-
cision precisely where we stand In c,oar
effect he says that both Williamson and Sul-
tan and every other newsdealer who bas 20.
fused to sell the Hearst papers have been
the victims of an unlawful conspiracy and
combination on the part OF the newsnaner
publishers and their distributing aoen+
which injustice he is able to overcome and
correct in the Sultan case because sul+or
does business in his own store but uh;oh
'nJus'ice cannot be corrected in the case Of
d i'cehsee' because the rights reposed bv
law IN pubhc official may also involve a
duty and that duty may be to prescribe nre-
clsely the public service that must be mar
1ormedsn conformity with the license
have presented to Mr. Harmon. who
seems TO me to be a fairminded man. this
consideration: while it may be vour drtv
to see to it that your licensees perform
public service that is the condition Of t,e
grant, it cannot be your duty so to applv
that principle as to carry out the nurnoses
OF an unlawful conspiracy"
LEMUEL z. OIJICC