The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-05-14
Applegate is Found Guilty
of PrOfiteering In Sugar
Is First Convicted Under Lever
Food Control Law i'm North
ern Florida District.
MADE Is CENTS A POUND
Judge Sheppard Holds Replace
ment Value Only Bears on
Determining Wilfulness

Elbert NJ. Applegate, grocer at SIC n.
Ninth-ave., was found guilty in the
federal district court yesterday of vio-
lation of the Lever food control act.
specifically making an unreasonable
profit on sugar. The conviction was
the first for profiteering in the northern
district of Florida Evidence submit
ted by the government showed that
Applegate bought sugar at 1890 per
hundred pounds and sold it at 35 cents
a pound, profit of 1871 cents pound,
gross.
In delivering his charge to the jury,
Judge Sheppard said that under tho
Lever act the replacement value of the
sugar at the time of sale could not
be taken into account in determining
a reasonable profit, except as il would
tend to show the intent or wilfulness
of the offense.
Evidence in the case was very brief
j. E. Elliott, a special agent of the de-
partment of justice, testified that on
April % he bought a pound of sugar
from one of Applegate's clerks for 35
cents and then asked Mr.. Applegate
for the invoices, first explaining his
official position. Mr.. Elliott said that
he was told by Mr.. Applegate that the
invoices could not be found but that
the sugar was bought about 10 days
previous from Will L. Meyer at S26.5O
a hundred weight.
V. Z. Kelley, another special agent,
testified that he was present when
Mr.. Elliott held his convention with
Mr.. Applegate and corroborated the
testimony of Mr.. Elliott.
Oliver Brawner, employed by w. L.
Meyer, testified that he sold 10 1OO-lh.
sacks of sugar to the Applegate Gro
Gerry at 1890 a hundred pounds on
May 10.
Will L. Meyer was qualified as an
expert. He testified that it averaged
about 16 per cent on the sales for
doing business in Pensacola, IL per
cent for retailers having a delivery. He
said that 25 per cent was a fair margin
of profit for a grocer to make.
There were no witnesses for the de-
Tense, counsel contenting themselves
with cross-examination Of government
witnesses. Mr.. BealPs motion to quash
the second count of the Indictment
was sustained by Judge Sheppard, who
held that the attorney general could
not rule as to what constituted a rea-
sonable profit. The count was that the
defendant had charged more than
cents a pound over the purchase price.
The first count, that of making an
profit, was sustained.
Assistant District Attorney Hoffman
made the opening argument for the
government and was followed by
Anderson for the defense.
Phillip ID. Beall closed the argument
for the defense, arguing that the de-
fendant should be discharged because
the government has no right to take
away mans property whether il does
It directly by confiscation or indirectly
by making him sell at loss"
District Attorney Neeley closed the
case. He reviewed the
evidence briefly, and insisted that a
verdict Of guilty was due because the
defense had refused to attempt TO pre-
sent evidence to contradict the govern
nent. They had every opportunity"
Mr.. Neeley said, but they refused to
bring their books in here"
After hearing the charge from
Judge Sheppard the jury retired and
n about 80 minutes reported a verdict
If guilty as charged" Sentence will
probably be pronounced today.