New Britain herald., 1922-04-17
SUPREME COURT IN
 DECISION FAVORS
 G0VT.PR0SECUTION
Continued From First Page).

and it's affiliated companies, under the Clayton act. The case was twice oral- ly argued before the court.
 Tine Clayton Law
 When the lower federal courts de- cided against the government in it's suit against the corporation under the Sherman antitrust law, congress en- acted the Clayton law, and while the Sherman act case was pending in the supreme court, the government ob- tained an injunction against the cor poration in the United States district court at St. Louis, restricting it tenn porarily from continuing it's lease practices until the courts could deter mine whether such practices were in violation of section three of the Clay ton act. It was claimed by the gov ernment that the section was drafted with particular reference to the leases of the corporation II provided that it shall be unlawful for any per sons engaged in interstate commerce to lease patented machinery, or to fix It's rental, on the condition that the person leasing the same shall not use or deal in the machinery, supplies and other commodities of q competitor, where the effect of the lease may be to substantially lessn coempetition or tend to create monopoly
 Injunction Cancelled
 The preliminary injunction granted by Judge Dyer was cancelled by the circuit court of appeals at St Paul. NxriI ,eI, al luminous record was taken by an oX- aminer from the United States dis trict court at St. Louis and Judge Triber sitting, granted an injunction on March Fl, 1920 restricting the cor poration from continuing it's lease practices, holding them to be in vio- lation of the Clayton act. The iniunC- ton was suspended by the supreme court pending the final determination of the case.
 The supreme court in the mean time in May, 1918, decided in favor of the corporation under the sherman anti trust law, holding the lease clauses used by the corporation a proper exercise of it's patent rights, and the corporation was not an un- lawful combination in restraint Of trade.
 Corporation Claims
 The corporation, retaining owner ship of the patented q machines it man ufactures, contendcl that hy shipping them to It's employees &t tho places where they install thcm all interstate features of the transaction are con ! cluded before the leases are signed. 1 A close inspection of the machines is | maintained by the corporation. which f also repairs them While the form of | lease now in use is not the same | which the courts passed upon in the | Sherman act case, the government | insists that in it's tying provisions 1t . Is illegal, asserting that shoe manu- | lecturers are offered the option of cX- clusively using the machines as well . as certain supplies sold by the cor | poration, or paying a royalty, based ! upon the total output Of inc factory, ! if machines of competitors arc also . used. The royalty, the government ! insisted, is prohibitivc and the shoe . manufacturer in actual experience is offered no alternative, but must op. crate under the lease which restricts him to the machines made by the cor poration.
 The government stated in the Clay ton act case that it was proceeding "upon the assumption that the or ganization of the United company was lawful" and declared that if makes no complaint Of the size of tho de- fendants, or ill itself of the size of their busincss'
 The government declared that il only sought 10 prevent the further use of certain leases which the district court found forbidden by the Clayton act II is not contonded, the govern mcnt stated, that the overwhelming of the United com pany in the particular field is due wholly 10 the leasing practices in question:" 1t is only necessary to