THE SUGAR CASE

Southland Times, Issue 17225, 21 December 1912, Page 6

THE SUGAR CASE

THE CHIEF .11’STICE'S .JUDGMENT. (Per" United Press Association). WEI.LIXGTOX. December I.'o. Sir llobert Stout has delivered reserved Judgment in tie 1 sugar ease, tie, .Kins v. the .Merchants’ Association. IJo found: (1) That the discount, scales ol' the Colonial Sugar Company Xos. a and ;J rerc marie to prevent competition in tho ,*;tle tinrl disposal of sugar*. (a> Th.at tliey were made to enable a commercial trust, or association. or group of buyers to yet control of the distribution of sugar, (:; > That they were made so as to pre■vent Fairbairn, Wright and Co. or other persons from purchasing sugar, and giving certain discounts to purchas.-rs from them. (I) That, defendants were acting in •■consort or conspiracy togeih.-r in get Aids control. I.ii Ti'.al they were made y u as in ensure a prolit lhai migiii otherwise am pave gone to memiiers of the l rust gnto memiiers of hi. tries;. in the course of his p.idgtm id .sir 'Ttohert Stout said that in his opinion tile c'ourl must hold that beooiMg an the price nf goods or uni r.-'luring t hem "w hen liiey e o 11 1 1 1 1 j'ei 1 1 a - ' -i! If In.-re were •free eompel i 1 ion, was contrary In lijn pill'lie interest. 'l'o s.t;, t i;: 1 1 the ili.fel•cuce ol' i or |U percent. op good; would Tint nff. ct prie.-s y/as rail !■i ’' ■ •i. The

oniv evidence (111 II!'' Slll'lee! Vhls lii:ll ii H'liuM ; i It* ■ t i•!•i >• ■ -S 11 * li;" eo 11 sim 11 •; . As ’till! 1 1" IV in 111 I! Is (-nil'll 111! '' Vi I I' 1 1! I' I ' I'> L' 1 1 , ! - tnnlii-l iin" sI a leneai 1 • {’;(i :ii in I i < 'on rl must am!i" timl no .-ned evidence i.-i ni 111 'in v• ’ lit'' li (Mil- <l. Hi.-; Il<>none !i"M Inal dm A;isl r: 1 1 i.i n foul Vi'in I I'll •'■ >ccs nut I 1 11.-I wild jthe case iiinlcr review. Jr tee ."divar ( Vimiiii ny <'; i!' ri| 1 1 mil nr n it. i i is, "d In curry mil seli'iiies l!i;r ilic .'-'mini" deI'lurcil I" I" 1 cm 11 MViici- mien scin-incs anus I. iic ilccmcil In l'c emit rarv in tinpublic ini"i'"ci. 'Alia! win; dm aim nl' < 1 1 -* iV■ r i (i; i n 1.-, in nll c i'i n v lie- .‘■■cn li-n In hie opinion. i lid'.- eel | i... only ji:jtivmr. I ■ ic,is In iirii’. eMI jj"i suns '.vim •wero imf mi'iriiici's <.r ii ■ cnnnii' I tr'wt selling ymls-m tim same price ,i ■; p'-TSOII.-l Wild W'le 11.1'' 111 1 1' ■ !'S, Ilf lie eomTnerclu! lrm-1. I 1 v.ns in inrun':.' a (Jiscoia'i for nnc class cic! iml I'lir another ('l'.’.'.c- —!•> urraime discoum I'nr a class that u'WiM nlicy the I trust, aoii Kire fin'illier 'lismiml to a, ciass ‘hut v.‘ ll lll l l M"l "he" tiie eiiinia. rriiil trust. Such .vns ilisUin'l l.v prohibited by section "■ "f the Ad. ii" to-jjkl till rim 1 1 ■;i ■■ 1 11 luiii s miilr\ "I 1 the offerees char?eil in pura-cruiiii 7 m’ the star,.? me nt ol: claim in the first aclim,. bein'; sui offence mm'lit s. el ion r. ni the Ad. Tire Suu'ur ( '"mpa i.y was jruili • under sei timi 3 in iriviim di.iei'miLs in aaxl <'u. 'l'he il" I,'e.Miiuat.s other -th-sai the Suyur o'tn[.;i:i,y wiirn umiliy of an i.lf-nco under peel ion 0 or' tlm Act. to die, ucconil aelniri ho form.l that Xjevtn anti <.‘o. were- not. the principal;; in ■the traussirUon in hiviiiy discounts, tun! not uaeni-S of the Suyar ( oiiipuay. y. ac Jl dcl'eraJunt was liemi un a if-ireum to cf I*o9o in the lirsi action, vvilli (n.s.-.