United States v. American-Asiatic Steamship Company et al. (steamship lines to ports in the Far East).-In February, 1915, a decision adverse to the Government was handed down in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. An appeal has been taken and the case will probably be argued during the present term of the Supreme Court.

United States v. Hollis et al., United States v. Hartwick et al., and United States v. The Colorado & Wyoming Lumber Dealers' Association et al. (lumber cases).-The Hollis case was argued in the District Court for the District of Minnesota in December, 1914, and a decision is awaited. The other two cases are at issue, but will not be tried until the Hollis case has been decided.

United States v. United Shoe Machinery Co. et al.—A decision adverse to the Government and dismissing the petition was handed down in March, 1915. An appeal has been taken to the Supreme Court.

United States v. National Cash Register Co. et al.-The defendants appealed from the judgment of the district court, imposing jail sentences and fines, and in a decision handed down in March, 1915, the court of appeals reversed the judgment of the lower court. The Government made application to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, which was denied on June 14, 1915. The further action to be taken in this case is now being considered. The civil case against substantially the same defendants is at issue and will be pressed to a conclusion.

United States v. The Keystone Watch Case Co. et al.—A decision in part favorable and in part adverse to the contentions of the Government was handed down in January, 1915. A decree in conformity therewith was entered in June, 1915, from which both the Government and the defendants have appealed to the Supreme Court.

United States v. Isaac Whitney et al. (milk cases.)-Certain of the defendants have entered pleas of nolo contendere. As to the others, the indictments are still pending.

United States v. Associated Billposters and Distributors et al.A demurrer having been overruled, this case was tried in open court in July last, and a decision is awaited.

United States v. Motion Picture Patents Company et al.-A decision favorable to the Government was handed down on October 1, 1915, and the form of decree to be entered is now under consideration. United States v. The Master Horseshoers' National Protective Association of America et al.-The case was not contested by some of the defendants, and decrees have been entered as to them. Demurrers of the remaining defendants were overruled, and they have indicated a willingness to consent to the entry of a decree without fur

ther litigation. The form of decree to be entered is now under consideration.

United States v. Charles S. Mellen et al.-This case, instituted in December, 1912, and charging the defendants with conspiring to prevent the construction by or in the interest of the Grand Trunk Railway Co. of certain lines of railroad in New England, thereby forestalling threatened competition with the New Haven System, is awaiting trial.

United States v. United Shoe Machinery Co. of New Jersey et al.— The prosecution of this case has been deferred pending the disposition of the civil case in the district of Massachusetts against practically the same defendants.

United States v. Board of Trade of the city of Chicago et al.-The court decided this case in favor of the Government on September 8, 1915, and ordered the preparation of an appropriate decree. The decree to be entered is now being prepared.

United States v. The Cleveland Stone Co. et al. This case is being prepared for early trial in the district court.

United States v. Corn Products Refining Co. et al.—The taking of testimony is nearing completion.

United States v. Eastman Kodak Co. et al.-A decision favorable to the Government was handed down on August 24, 1915, and the form of decree to be entered is now under consideration.

United States v. Quaker Oats Co. et al.-The taking of testimony has been completed and the case is being prepared for early trial.

United States v. Reading Co. et al. (anthracite coal combination).Decided by the district court July 3, 1915. In substantial part the decision was favorable to the Government, i. e., it was held that the union through a holding company of the Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co. and the Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Co., two of the great anthracite coal-producing companies, is a combination in restraint of trade. In some important respects, however, the decision. was adverse to the Government. An appeal will be taken to the Supreme Court.

.

United States v. American Can Co. et al.-This case was argued in the district court on October 5, and the decision of the court is awaited.

United States v. John P. White et al.-Pending.

United States v. Frank J. Hayes et al.-Pending.

United States v. Southern Pacific Co., Central Pacific Railway Co. et al. This case is set for trial in the district court on December 1, 1915.

United States v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. et al.-A decision adverse to the Government and dismissing the petition was handed

down in December, 1914. An appeal has been taken to the Supreme Court.

United States v. Knauer et al.-In February, 1915, a verdict of guilty was returned in this case. The defendants made a motion for a new trial. The court imposed fines aggregating $3,000 against four of the defendants and granted a writ of error as to them; and pending a decision by the court of appeals ordered the case to stand on the motion for a new trial as to the remaining 31 defendants.

3. CASES INTITUTED SINCE JULY 1, 1914.

United States v. Booth Fisheries Co. et al., eastern district of Washington.-Indictment returned July 20, 1914, charging defendants with maintaining a combination to fix the price of fish in certain sections. Awaiting trial.

United States v. The New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. et al., southern district of New York.-Petition filed July 23, 1914, charging defendants with monopolizing transportation facilities in New England. Final decree entered October 17, 1914, in respect of which full particulars were given in my last annual report.

United States v. Western Cantaloupe Exchange et al., northern district of Illinois.-Indictment returned August 7, 1914, charging defendants with combining to restrain and monopolize interstate trade in cantaloupes. Awaiting trial.

United States v. Collins et al., District of Columbia.-Indictment returned September 4, 1914, against 31 commission merchants, charging them with engaging in a combination to fix arbitrarily and without competition the prices at which country produce is bought and sold in the District of Columbia. Demurrer overruled May 1, 1915, and case is awaiting trial.

United States v. McCoach et al., western district of Pennsylvania.Indictment returned October 5, 1914, against 33 individuals, each a master plumber and retail dealer in plumbing supplies, charging them with entering into a combination to secure a monopoly of the business of selling and installing plumbing supplies. Awaiting trial.

United States v. Irving et al., district of Utah.-Indictment returned October 31, 1914, against 14 individuals, each a master plumber and retail dealer in plumbing supplies, charging them with entering into a combination to restrain trade in plumbing supplies. Demurrer overruled and motion to quash denied in January, 1915. Awaiting trial.

United States v. Rockefeller et al., southern district of New York. First indictment returned November 2, 1914, and superseding indictment returned February 26, 1915, against 21 individuals, each at some time a director or officer, or both, of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., charging them with conspiring to

monopolize the transportation facilities of New England. Numerous demurrers, pleas in abatement, etc., have been heard and disposed of and the trial of the case is now in progress.

United States v. Isaac E. Chapman et al., southern district of New York.-Indictment returned January 27, 1915, charging a combination and conspiracy to monopolize interstate trade and commerce in the derrick, lighterage, and wrecking business in New York Harbor and its environs and along the Atlantic coast of the United States. Demurrer sustained April 13, 1915.

United States v. Carl C. King et al. (Aroostook Potato Shippers Association), district of Massachusetts.-Indictment returned March 4, 1915, charging defendants with entering into a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade in potatoes. A demurrer to the indictment was overruled.

United States v. Michael Artery et al., northern district of Illinois. Eight indictments returned in January and April, 1915, against certain so-called business agents of Chicago labor unions, charging them with combining and conspiring to prevent the unloading in Chicago of goods shipped from other States.

United States v. Michael Boyle et al., northern district of Illinois. Two indictments returned April 27, 1915, charging a conspiracy amongst labor unions and certain manufacturers in Chicago to prevent the installation in Chicago of electrical appliances and lighting fixtures manufactured elsewhere. Demurrers to the indictments have been argued and decisions are awaited.

United States v. S. F. Bowser & Company, (Inc.,) et al., district of Indiana.-Petition filed June 10, 1915, charging defendants with combining to restrain and attempting to monopolize interstate trade and commerce in pumps, tanks, and outfits for the storage and handling of gasoline and other inflammable liquids. A decree granting the relief sought by the Government was entered simultaneously with the filing of the petition.

United States v. United Shoe Machinery Company et al., eastern district of Missouri.-Petition filed October 18, 1915, charging that the so-called tying clauses in the series of leases used by the defendants in the conduct of their business are violative of section 3 of the Clayton Act. A temporary restraining order was granted at the time the petition was filed, and an application for a preliminary injunction pending the final determination of the case was argued October 27. On November 12 the preliminary injunction was granted.

CASES UNDER THE ACT TO REGULATE COMMERCE.

1. UNDER THE COMMODITIES CLAUSE.

The purpose of the commodities clause is to protect shippers from the unlawful discriminations and disadvantages inherent in the own

ership by railroads of the property transported by them and to prevent railroads from monopolizing by means of such discriminations the production and sale of articles transported over their lines.

The case of United States v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company and Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Coal Company, under the commodities clause and the antitrust act, was decided adversely to the Government in the district court. An appeal was taken to the Supreme Court, which unanimously reversed the lower court, holding that the unity of management existing between the railroad and coal companies was violative of the commodities clause. It also held the contract between the companies to be in violation of the antitrust act.

In the cases against the Lehigh Valley Co. and the Reading Co., under the Federal antitrust law the defendants are also charged with transporting anthracite coal in which they have an interest.

The Lehigh Valley case was decided against the Government by the District Court for the Southern District of New York on the authority of the decision of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in the case of United States v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad Company et al., above referred to. The latter case, however, as just stated, has since been reversed by the Supreme Court. The Lehigh Valley case is now pending before the Supreme Court.

In the Reading case the decision was adverse to the Government. An appeal has been taken to the Supreme Court.

The case pending in the western district of New York against the Pennsylvania Railroad Co., charged with transporting in interstate commerce anthracite coal mined by the Susquehanna Coal Co., with which it is united in ownership and management, is set for trial during the November term, 1915.

2. REBATES AND UNLAWFUL DISCRIMINATIONS.

Since the last report 70 cases have been instituted and 45 concluded under the provisions of the act to regulate commerce and the so-called Elkins Act prohibiting the giving or receiving of rebates and discriminations. The following is a summary of such cases:

(A) CASES INSTITUTED.

United States v. American Gas Machine Co., district court, Minnesota, November 6, 1914, indictment charging presentation of false claims; 1 count. United States v. Art Shade Co., district court, northern Illinois, November 6, 1914, indictment charging false billing; 10 counts.

United States v. Fred C. Boorman, C. Wickham Parker, and Albert H. Nelson, trading under the name of Interstate & Continental Freight Traffic Bureau, district court, northern Illinois, July 12, 1915, indictment charging presentation of false claims; 25 counts.