The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1920-06-09
LAW RELATIVE TO
PROF|TEER|NG
Judge HOwe's Instructions
to Grand Jury in Fed
eral Court
MORE IMPORTANT
PROVISIONS CITED
Mere Agreement to Exact Excessive
Prices for Necessaries Is Breach of
Law, Although Agreement May Be
Unsuccessful.

Law, Altnougn Agreement may be
Unsuccessful.
At the opening of the United States
District court, now in session at Wind
sor, Judge Harland B. Howe, who is now
presiding at a session here, in charging
the grand jury instructed them as fol-
lows in regard to profiteering:
As it is quite likely you win consider
many profiteering cases, the court will
especially call your attention to the more
important provisions of the law in this
regard.
| In order to assure an adequate supply
necessaries of life, on the 22nd day of
October, 1919, congress passed a law
against boarding, monopolizing, or spec
ulating in foods, feeds, fuel, wearing APP
parel, fertilizer, tools, machinery and
equipment required for the production
of foods, feeds and fuel.
| This law makes it unlawful, among
other things, for any person to willfully
hoard or monopolize such necessities, to
make any unjust or unreasonable rate or
charge in handling or dealing in or with
such necessaries, or TO conspire, combine,
lagree, or arrange with any other person
to restrict their distribution or to exact
excessive prices for such goods. The
penalty may be a fine not exceeding
$1,000 or Imprisonment for not more
than two years, or both.
The most important part of the stat
ute is the provision against making any
: unjust or unreasonable rate or charge in
handling in or dealing in or with such
goods The word 'willfully' as used in
the statute is defined to mean willingly,
purposely, selling such goods at unjust
: or unreasonable prices, as contradistin
: guished from Inadvertently or "acci-
; dentally" The words rate" or charge
are defined to mean the price at which
, said goods are sold. Whether the prices
? which are charged are unjust or unreason-
able, are questions of fact for you to de-
eide, acting as reasonable men and taking
into consideration what price the person
; making the sale paid for the goods in
!, the market; whether they were bought
, in the ordinary course of trade at the
, market price at that time; the length
, of time the goods had been carried in
. stock; the expenses of carrying on the
: business; what a fair and reasonable
profit on the goods would be- and all the
other facts and circumstances in and
about the transaction but not how
much the market price has advanced
from the time the goods were purchased
|, to the time they are sold.
Another very important provision OF
the statute is that it is made unlawful
for person to conspire, combine, agree
or arrange with another person to exact
excessive prices for necessaries. Under
this provision, if two or more person:
agree or arrange together to exact exees
/ sive prices for necessaries, this is
Y breach of the law, although the agree
n ment or arrangement is unsuccessful, anC
o no excessive prices are actually exacteC
L or received. Congress made this law very
d sweeping in its terms, and it was in
al tended to meet such offenders on the very
threshold of their preparation to eXac
lexcessIve prices for the necessaries of life
To illustrate: Two or more persons
agree or arrange together to exact ex
eessive prices. They have committed tn
If offense, they have done Just what con
gress has prohibited, although they neve
lcarry out their agreement or arrange
at ment.
IN Such conspiracy, combination, agree
n, ment or arrangement may be proved b
IL the proof of facts from which you ca
ng fairly and reasonably infer the existene
g. of such conspiracy, combination, agree
1t. ment or arrangement. As such agree
tn ments or arrangements are usually secre
de and difficult to discover, the law is tha
nd it is not necessary to prove by diree
ne evidence that the parties actually cam
IN together and agreed or arranged tina
% they would exact excessive prices fo
ey necessaries. This can be proved by TIL
proof of facts from which YOU can fairl
!, uS and reasonably infer that they had
ne common object to exact such prices {
70. by the proof of facts from which yo
a.. can fairly and reasonably infer that IL
10 - acts of each person were done in pursl
ance OF such common purpose and ca
:; culated to effect that purpose 1t shou
w be made to appear that the parti,
:" steadily pursued the same object by con
mon means all leading to the same resul
Concurrence of action is sufficient to el
able you to presume concurrence of SCI
timent and intention, and from this We
ay can find the fact that the agreement
arrangement existed. If you find tn,
the parties pursued the same object |
,er the same means with the intention of a
rs- eomplishing the objects which they we
ar pursuing, you can draw the conclusit
that they conspired. combined, agreed
arranged together to effect that obieC
md good question to ask yourselves is, ID
the parties have the common purpose