11.

12.

tained by fraud on the Patent Office. The case was referred to a Special Master in Chancery, before whom testimony was taken from time to time from April 1, 1925, to December 16, 1927. Case was argued before the Special Master during May, 1927, and the Master's report, containing findings and conclusions in favor of the defendants, was filed December 7, 1927. Exceptions to the Master's report and a motion to recommit were argued before the District Court from May 15 to 17, 1928, and decision reserved.

United States v. Seattle Produce Association et al. Petition filed July 18, 1924, in the District Court, Western District of Washington, alleging a combination and conspiracy in restraint of interstate and foreign trade and commerce in fruits, vegetables, and produce by means, among others, of agreements to fix and maintain prices, and through the cooperation of brokers to arbitrarily limit the amount of such produce reaching the market. Consent decree entered March 21, 1925, granting full relief prayed for.

United States v. Sisal Sales Corporation et al. Petition filed July 23, 1924, in the District Court, Southern District of New York, charging the defendants with combining and conspiring to restrain and monopolize interstate and foreign trade and commerce in sisal, a fibre principally grown in Mexico and used in the manufacture of binder twine, in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Law and the Wilson Tariff Act. The petition alleged, among other things, that a complete monopoly in Mexican sisal had been perfected by a contract between the Sisal Sales Corporation and the Comison Exportadora de Yucatan, whereby the former acted as the exclusive selling agent of the latter, which was protected by discriminatory taxes in its favor, in the State of Yucatan, so as to exclude other buyers; and that the money with which sisal was purchased from the Yucatan producers was furnished by the Sisal Sales Corporation. On defendants' motion, the Court dismissed

13.

14.

15.

the Government's petition on June 4, 1925, which decision was reversed by the Supreme Court on May 16, 1927. On consent of the Government, an order was entered by the District Court on March 29, 1928, discontinuing the case without prejudice on the ground that the issues presented had become moot.

United States v. Oregon Wholesale Grocers' Association et al. Petition filed September 29, 1924, in the District Court for the District of Oregon, alleging a conspiracy in restraint of interstate and foreign trade and commerce in groceries, by means, among others, of agreeing to fix and maintain prices, to exchange price lists, and to suppress competition among themselves and others by boycott and coercion. On June 4, 1926, a decree, enjoining any acts tending to restrict the freedom of manufacturers in selling, was entered with the consent of defendants.

United States v. Colgate & Company. Petition filed December 1, 1924, in the District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging an unlawful combination and conspiracy between defendant and a large number of wholesalers and retailers to restrain interstate trade and commerce in soaps, perfumery, and other toilet articles and to hinder, eliminate, and prevent competition by means of a policy of resale price fixation and maintenance in various forms, which had been in effect for many years. Order of discontinuance without prejudice entered December 3, 1925.

United States v. Lindsley Brothers Company et al. Indictment returned on December 20, 1924, in the District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, charging that defendants had unlawfully engaged in a combination in restraint of interstate and foreign trade and commerce in western red-cedar poles by means, among others, of agreements between themselves to eliminate competition as to terms and conditions of sale, as to treating charges, as to f. o. b. basing prices, as to charges for

16.

freight, and as to delivered prices, and of maintaining the Western Lumber & Pole Company, the Western Red Cedar Association, and Western Red Cedarmen's Information Bureau, for the purpose of distributing statistics and uniform freight-rate sheets and price lists. Trial of case was set for November 23, 1925, and on October 20, 1925, all corporate defendants entered pleas of guilty and were fined amounts aggregating $37,300, and the case was dismissed as to all individual defendants.

United States v. The National Peanut Cleaners and Shellers Association et al. Petition filed January 5, 1925, in the District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, charging defendants, cleaners and shellers of peanuts, with combining and conspiring to restrain interstate commerce by establishing and maintaining uniform and arbitrary terms, brokers' commissions, grades and conditions of sale, and by blacklisting and boycotting purchasers who failed to respect the same; by interchanging trade information for the purpose and with the effect of controlling buying and selling prices; and by attempting to prevent the orderly marketing by the Peanut Growers' Association of its holdings. Consent decree entered June 15, 1925, enjoining the practices complained of.

17.

United States v. William B. Fitzgerald et al. Indictment returned on May 20, 1925, in the District Court, Western District of New York, against 25 officials and members of railway employees' organizations, including certain defendants to the indictments previously returned in connection with the dynamiting of the High-Speed Line of the International Railway (supra, No. 42, p. 181). On January 14, 1926, case went to trial as to 10 defendants, during the course of which the indictment was dismissed as to 6 defendants, and on January 21, 1926, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty as to 4 defendants. Nolle prosequi entered as to remaining defendants in June, 1926.

18.

19.

20.

United States v. William H. Coye et al. Indictment returned May 29, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, against 18 corporate defendants, members of a trade association known as the National Refrigerator Manufacturers' Association, and William H. Coye and Clarence W. Coye, secretary and assistant secretary, respectively, of said association, charging an unlawful combination to restrain interstate trade and commerce in refrigerators and ice boxes by means, among others, of understandings and agreements to eliminate and prevent competition among the members of the association and to fix prices. On June 30, 1925, case dismissed as to defendant Coye, and all but two of remaining defendants pleaded guilty and were fined amounts aggregating $68,000. On November 18, 1925, one corporate defendant entered plea of nolo contendere and was fined $2,000. Case pending as to one defendant, Bohn Refrigerator Company.

United States v. William B. Baker et al. Indictment returned May 29, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, against 55 concerns, members of a trade association known as the National Association of Chair Manufacturers, and William B. Baker and William H. Coye, secretary and agent, respectively, of said association, charging an unlawful combination in restraint of interstate trade and commerce in chairs by means, among others, of understandings and agreements to eliminate and prevent competition between members of the association and to fix prices. Case dismissed as to defendant Coye, and at various times all but two of the remaining defendants entered pleas of guilty and were fined amounts aggregating $176,000. On October 7, 1925, nolle prosequi entered as to remaining defendants.

United States v. Arthur C. Brown et al. Indictment returned May 29, 1925, in the District Court, Northern

21.

22.

District of Illinois, against 190 concerns, members of an unincorporated trade association known as the National Alliance of Furniture Manufacturers, 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 case goods, i. e., dining-room and bed-room furniture, radio cabinets, and clock cases, by means, among others, of understandings and agreements to eliminate competition between members of the association as to prices, etc., and to curtail production. From time to time during July, 1925, 93 defendants entered pleas of guilty and were fined amounts aggregating $209,000. On July 25, 1925, upon the return of superseding indictments (see Nos. 24 and 25 infra), nolle prosequi entered as to each of remaining 99 defendants.

United States v. One-Piece Bifocal Lens Co., Bausch & Lomb Optical Co., and American Optical Co. Petition filed June 5, 1925, in the District Court, District of Indiana, alleging a combination and conspiracy to restrain interstate trade and commerce in one-piece bifocal lenses and blanks, and to hinder, eliminate, and prevent competition in the manufacture, sale, and resale thereof by means, among others, of so-called license contracts under certain patents owned by defendant, One-Piece Bifocal Lens Co., and agreements to fix, establish, and maintain resale prices, discounts, and terms of sale. On June 30, 1927, by stipulation the case was dismissed without prejudice.

United States v. Tanners Products Co., American Hair Felt Co. et al. Petition filed June 11, 1925, in the District Court, Northern District of Illinois, alleging that 115 tanning companies, combined in the Tanners Products Company, pooled all the cattle and calf hair produced by them and sold it through said company, and that by further unlawful combinations, contracts, agreements, corporate stock acquisitions, etc., defendants re