The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-05-01
Commissioner Believes There n
Probable Cause i'm Case of
Meyer WilIenZik.
COMMENDS COL. NEELEY
Discharges Sol Calm and William
Willenzik and Defers De-
cision on Lazar Calm.

L. S. Commissioner Avery announced
at the opening of the hearing of the
United States VS.. Sol and Lazar Calm
yesterday that he would bind over
Meyer Willenzik. whose case was heard
Thursday, TO the federal grand jury
and would discharge William willen-
xix because no evidence had been IL
troduced to show that he was coz
nected with the firm. Following the
hearing in the case of Sol and Lazar
Calm. also charged with violation of
the Lever act, Judge Avery ordered
Sol Calm discharged and decided TO de-
fer announcement of his decision in the
case of Lazar Calm.
In announcing his decision in the
Calm cases. Judge Avery said he be-
lieved the district attorneys office very
properly started the investigations
which led TO the hearings. He indi-
Gated that IL was in the duty of the
district attorneys office to bring such
cases into court in order that full and
impartial investigation might be made.
When the commissioners court was
called to order yesterday afternoon,
Judge Avery read memorandum opin-
ion on the Willenzik cases which were
heard Thursday. The opinion did not
announce what action the court would
take but Judge Avery later said that
when the defendants appeared before
him Monday he would discharge Will
liam and bind over Meyer WiIlenzik.
Judge Avery said:
''This court is one of very limited
jurisdiction and its findings cannot.
in the ordinary sense of the term. be
regarded as adjudication. 1t is re-
quired in proceedings like the present
one to ascertain and decide only
whether there is probable cause for
holding one accused of a criminal Of
fense against the laws of the United
States. In this case therefore, il be-
comes my duty, as United States Com
missioner, TO find out from the evil
dence submitted to me whether IL is
probable that by the proper function
aries of the district court the accused
will be regarded under the law and
the evidence subject TO formal prose-
cution upon. the general charge made
here before me.
I'm this case / am not prepared TO
say that the government has produced
the evidence that would justify a jury
in finding the accused guilty beyond
a reasonable doubt, but am sure that
there is enough to hold the accused
until the proper officers Of the district
court shall have an opportunity to fully
investigate the case.
II am also impressed by the argu-
ment of counsel for the accused as to
the Interpretation of the statute upon
which this. prosecution is based. But
| can see how an intelligent court with
Jurisdiction may reach a diff
I mill
that cannot fully agree with the argu-
nent.
THE provision of the statute in
yoIred ..aTe ilas reference TO merchants
md dealers whose business is not to
buy goods and keep them. but IL is
10 buy them for the purpose of as
speedily as possible getting rid of them
oy sales at just and reasonable pro-
Its. The only replacement of goods
in such business is sup
plying wants created by sales in usual
conduct OF business. which sales are
he sole purpose Of the business. The
statute provides that in such sales,
harges shall be reasonable. as, in the
ales to the retailers by the whole
aiers or manufacturers. charges shall
,e reasonable.
Suppose that through usual and
ordinary business occurrences a mer-
hant, either wholesale or retail. finds
eft on his hands. not through hoard
ng. goods bought at a time when prices
we're comparatively low, think he may
harge a price based upon values at
he time of sale rather than upon
'rices prevailing at the time the goods
we're bought. But ! don't think that
e may fix values by reference 10 prices
harged by others. which are them
elves excessive. In other words. he
nay not avail himself of the trans
,ressions of others as a basis or ex-
use for transgression by him.
Il think as war time measure the
tatute should receive such construc-
ion. IT is susceptible OF such con-
truction and so construed will prob
bly, be upheld by the higher courts"
In the Calm case evidence was sub
1itted and il was agreed that sugar
ad been bought by Sol Calm e. Co.
{ q cents and sold at % cents a
ound.
w. L. Meyer testified that retailer
hould make from 20 to 25 per cent. on
ross sales in order 10 net a profit
n his business. He told Judge Avery
hat the average cost Of doing business
4 Pensacola is 16 per cent.
Testifying in his own defense. Lazar
'ahn said that il cost him 17-52 per
ent. TO do business in 1919. He said
hat buying sugar at p and selling IL
{ 25. cents a pound allowed him
ross profit OF 16 per cent. on the sell
ng price, or a net loss OF Is per cent
n every pound sold.
Max Lee Bear testified as TO the
ost OF sugar, wholesale. following prac.
ically the same lines as at the Willen-
TX hearing.
In his argument, Judge Neeley in
isted that the case before the cour'