24.

23.

strained interstate trade and commerce in cattle and calf hair and soft hair felt, and monopolized and attempted to monopolize such trade and commerce. On October 3, 1927, the date set for trial, defendants yielded the relief sought by the Government, and a consent decree was entered.

United States v. Carson Brewing Co., a Corporation, et al. Petition filed June 12, 1925, in the District Court, District of Nevada, alleging a conspiracy in restraint of interstate trade and commerce in ice manufactured, produced, purchased, and sold in California and shipped and transported to and through the several States and more particularly Carson City, Nevada, and its vicinity, by means, among others, of various unlawful agreements to fix, maintain, and enhance prices and to suppress competition through the apportionment of territory. Preliminary motions argued October 27, 1927, and decision is awaited.

et al.

con

United States v. Berkey & Gay Furniture Co. Indictment returned July 25, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, against 36 cerns, members of an unincorporated trade association known as the National Alliance of Furniture Manufacturers, and 35 individuals, including officers, ployees, and agents of said concerns, and Arthur Brown and William H. Coye, secretary and

em

C.

agent,

respectively, of said association, charging an unlawful

combination in restraint of interstate trade and

com

in

merce in dining-room furniture by means, among others,
of understandings and agreements to eliminate competi
tion betweeen members of the association as to prices,
etc., and to curtail production. This indictment
cluded as defendants certain corporations, partnerships,
and unincorporated concerns which did not enter pleas
of guilty to the indictment returned against them
May 29, 1925 (see No. 20, supra). On October 25, 1925,
one corporate defendant entered a plea of guilty and was

on

25.

fined $1,000. Demurrers overruled December 18, 1925, and on January 18, 1926, remaining defendants entered pleas of not guilty. Case consolidated with No. 25, infra, and after a trial lasting 10 weeks, the jury failed to agree and was discharged on March 21, 1927. During the trial nolle prosequi were entered as to 1 corporate and 2 individual defendants. On March 6, 1928, 35 corporate defendants pleaded nolo contendere and fines aggregating approximately $56,000 were imposed, and nolle prosequi entered as to remaining defendants.

United States v. Aulsbrook & Jones Furniture Co. et al. Indictment returned July 25, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, against 47 concerns, members of the National Alliance of Furniture Manufacturers, and 37 individuals, including officers, employees, or agents of said concerns, and Arthur C. Brown and William H. Coye, secretary and agent, respectively, of said association, charging an unlawful combination in restraint of interstate trade and commerce in bedroom furniture, by means, among others, of understandings and agreements to eliminate competition between members of the association as to prices, etc., and to curtail production. This indictment included certain corporations, partnerships, businesstrust, and unincorporated concerns which did not enter pleas of guilty to the indictment returned against them on May 29, 1925 (see No. 20, supra). On November 14, 1925, one corporate defendant entered plea of guilty and was fined $1,000, and nolle prosequi entered as to one individual defendant. Demurrers overruled December 18, 1925, and on January 18, 1926, remaining defendants pleaded not guilty. On April 14, 1926, one corporate defendant entered plea of guilty and was fined $1,000, and case dismissed as to one individual defendant. Case was tried with No. 24, supra, and jury failing to agree was discharged. On March 6, 1928, 36 corporate defendants entered pleas of nolo contendere

and were fined amounts aggregating approximately $44,000, and nolle prosequi were entered as to remaining defendants.

NOTE. In connection with the presentation of cases Nos. 24 and 25to the grand jury, on July 18, 1925, Arthur C. Brown, secretary of the association, was adjudged in contempt of court for refusal to produce certain records of the association, and sentenced to 30 days in jail. Appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals on writ of error argued on November 12, 1925. Latter Court certified certain questions to the Supreme Court, which reviewed the entire record and affirmed the decision of the District Court on February 20, 1928. On July 2, 1928, sentence was suspended and Brown was admitted to probation for 30 days.

26.

cor

United States v. Lay Fish Company, Inc., et al. Indictment returned July 29, 1925, in the District Court,. Southern District of New York, charging 17 porations or firms and 12 individuals, wholesale dealers in and receivers on consignment of dead fresh-water fish caught in Western States and in the Dominion of Canada, with engaging in a combination and con-spiracy to restrain and monopolize interstate and foreign trade and commerce in such fish, by means of agreements to eliminate competition among themselves in the purchase thereof, and to fix and maintain prices. to retail dealers in and around New York City. On January 4, 1926, the court decided in favor of the Government demurrers to five special pleas in bar of individual defendants. On May 12, 1926, all defendants pleaded guilty and were fined amounts aggregating $31,000.

27.

same

On the same date a petition in equity was filed against the same defendants, alleging substantially the practices charged in this indictment, and a consent decree was entered. (See No. 34, infra.)

United States v. Porcelain Appliance Corporation et al.. Petition filed Oct. 16, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Ohio, against the above-named defendant, a patent holding and licensing corporation,. 16 other corporations which manufacture porcelain in

28.

29.

sulators and 7 individuals, alleging a combination and conspiracy to monopolize interstate trade and commerce in assembled two-part porcelain insulators, to eliminate all competition among themselves, and to establish uniform prices for their products, which combination and conspiracy are alleged to have been accomplished through the pooling of competing patents and the granting thereunder of licenses with price-fixing provisions. Preliminary motions were denied on September 9, 1926, and case is awaiting trial.

United States v. Milan Krewoski and Paul Dosen. Indictment returned on October 20, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of West Virginia, charging a combination and conspiracy in restraint of interstate trade and commerce in connection with the dynamiting of a bridge on the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, in violation of sec. 1 of the Sherman law. On December 2,

1926, defendant Krewoski changed his plea to guilty, whereupon jail sentence of 6 months was imposed. Nolle prosequi entered June 20, 1927, as to defendant Dosen.

United States v. Calvin U. Whiffen et al. Information in contempt filed November 2, 1925, in the District Court, Southern District of Ohio, charging 90 sales agents of the National Cash Register Company and employees of sales agents, and two others, with having violated the provisions of the final decree entered in the case of United States v. National Cash Register Co. et al. (supra, No. 39, p. 114). Testimony was taken before a Special Examiner. On September 28, 1927, an order of dismissal was entered as to 70 defendants. November 29, 1927, the Court granted motion to dismiss as to 18 of remaining 22 defendants by reason of statute of limitations. Government's appeal to the Supreme Court from such decision was decided in its favor on May 14, 1928. On September 24, 1928, the Government moved the dismissal of 20 of the remaining defendants and went to trial against two defendants. On November 12, 1928,

18981-28--14

30.

31.

32.

the District Court rendered its opinion holding one of these defendants guilty on two counts and imposing a fine of $1,000 on each count, and dismissing the charges against the remaining defendant.

United States v. Flower Producers Co-Operative Association of New York, Inc., et al. Petition filed December 15, 1925, in the District Court for the Southern District of New York, charging the defendant association, its members, and 39 persons, firms, and corporations engaged as wholesalers with having conspired and combined to prevent cut flowers not grown by members of the association coming upon the New York market in competition with their product, by means, among others, of intimidation and threats of boycott, in violation of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act. Consent decree entered on January 15, 1926, dissolving the above-named association and enjoining the formation of any similar association for like purposes and objects.

Act

United States v. The Ward Food Products Corporation et al. Petition filed February 8, 1926, in the District Court for the District of Maryland, alleging a combination, conspiracy, and attempt to monopolize interstate trade and commerce in the baking industry in violation of the Sherman Antitrust and the acquiring of stock in competing companies in violation of the Clayton Act. The petition prayed that defendants be enjoined from carrying out the combination, conspiracy, and attempt to monopolize and that they be required to dispossess themselves of the stocks of competing companies. Consent decree dissolving The Ward Food Products Corporation and granting injunctive relief entered April 3, 1926.

United States v. National Food Products Corporation et al. Petition filed February 13, 1926, in the District Court for the Southern District of New York, to prevent and restrain violations of section 7 of Clayton Act through acquisitions of stock in com

the