Oxford eagle. (Oxford, Lafayette Co., Miss.) 1876-current, 1921-10-13

S. Y. ROBERTSON
Wins BIG suit
Case Will Be Appealed to Supreme
Court of Mississippi-Southern
Tariff Association Reviewed. Inn
pounded Funds Proviso.

jackson, Miss, Oct. 8.-The fire
insurance companies lost on every
point In an exhaustive opinion rem
aered today by Chancellor Stricken IN
the ANTITRUST case. Ihe chancellor
found the companies guilty OF vlolat-
ing the antitrust laws OF the state
and penalized them In an aggregate
sum ranging between seven and eight
million dollars.
1t is conceded, however, by we'll
informed lawyers that the maximum
amount that can be recovered against
the companies by the revenue agent
is the total sum winch he was able
TO lmpounu in the garnlShment proc
eSSeS against the underwriting agents
OF the companies. Inns Will appr0xI-
mate, 1t is believed, about one million
dollars, less the sum OF Slo0,UvU pre-
mum taxes which the court holds to
be due out OF the impounded funds.
Judge oGrlcker was promptly on
hand at III clock this morning at
the circuit court room, where a large
crowd, filling the available seats, had
previously gathered. His utterances
were extempore, only 'meager notes
uelng used. The chancellor began
with some personal remarks about the
conduct OF the trial, in which he COM
plimented the attorneys on each side
for their fairness and courtesy In the
conduct of the case.
He went into an exhaustive review
of the law of the case, commencing
with the law of conspiracy" quoting
literally from Biblical examples to
show what is considered to be the
necessary elements to constitute a
conspiracy from the earliest times.
He defined it to be an agreement by
which two or more persons or COR
porations or companies enter into an
arrangement to do lawful thing in
an unlawful manner, or an unlawful
thing in lawful manner, or an UNI
lawful thing in an unlawful manner.
He cited numerous decisions to show
that conspiracy may be proven pre-
sumptively and often must be so
proven, owing to the impossibility in
most cases Of showing any written or
verbal compact. He cited the statute
of Mississippi and other states and
showed it's identity with statutes of
other states, in which similar ques-
tons had arisen and in which the
courts had held insurance rating
compacts violative of the antitrust
laws.
The chancellor then went into an
exhaustive review of the testimony in
the case and quoted literally from the
testimony of Secretary Robertson OF
the advisory rating bureau, in which
he said that he used the books of the
Southeastern Tariff Association and
other rating books in this state, on
Ibis individual judgment" yet he had
admitted that ne had attended a,
meeting OF rate-making insurance rep
resentatives in Texas, where the con-
vention had agreed upon rate for
insuring cotton to be effective in all
states, and that Mr.. Robertson had
come back to Mississippi and had put
into effect the rates on cotton adopted
by this convention, as being "in his
judgment" proper and just rates.
Inc chancellor commented at some
length upon the Southeastern Tariff
Association and its method, and char
acterized it as being an association OF
| the insurance companies which had
| formed themselves into trust and
were working under the name of this
association: He referred to the fact
that the rates made by this company
were the rates which were adopted by
/ the Mississippi advisory and inspec-
ton bureau, and which were, adopted
through this bureau by the insurance
companies doing business in this state.
The decision as rendered affects all
of the 70-odd fire insurance companies
which were writing business in the
state, but does not affect the re-insur-
ing companies which were not sub
scribers to the advisory rating bu-
reau.
The insurance companies will ap-
peal the case at once, as soon as the
record can be prepared, to the SUI
preme court of Mississippi.
I, The penalty imposed on each of the
withdrawing fire. insurance companies
by the decision of Judge Stricken is
that each defendant company must
pay to the state of Mississippi the
sum Of $500 per day for each days
violation of the law during 1905 ard
1908. The statute was amended after
1908 to make the minimum $50 per
dsv and JUDGE Stricken fixed the
penalty f.tm 1J08 to the date of the
withdrawal of the companies from the
state at $2o Der dav for each company.
The penalty OF 5000 per day for the
first twtn years was the stasatory mn
imll
The decision has absorbed nnhlic !.
tention today and there are many
rumors current on the streets. One
of these is to the effect that the in
! surance companies will at once can
eel all of their policies now outstand-
/ ing in the state. None of the COM