UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS. E. C. KNIGII1' CO., ET AL.
1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT O~' THE UNITED STATES FOR(l)
'l'H~E EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA.
IN
EQUITY.
April Sessions, 1892.
No. 38.
Between
THE UNITED. STATES OF AMERICA,
Complain<ln t,
and
E. C. KNIGHT C0:\1PANY, Spreckels' Sugar Refining Company, Franklin
Sugai· Refining Company, Delaware t>ugar House, all of wbich said
defond_ants are corporations incoi·porated under the laws. of Pennsylvania, and having their principal. pfaces of Business in the. city of
Philadelphia, in the said State; Edward C. Knight, Edward C.
Knight, Jr., 'fhomas Cochran, Frederick D. I ...angenheim, Richard
E. Clay, George Franklin Davi8, :Edward Browning, C. A. Spreckles,
Louis 8preckles, Peter .A. Smith, Charles 'Watson, Charles C. Harrison, \Villiam \V. Frazier, Alfred C. Harrison, William II. Harrison,
George IL :Frazie1·, J. Vaughn l\Ierrick, \V~ IL Merrick, John E.
Cope, John 13irkbeck, citizens of the State of Pennsylvania; Claus
Sp1·eckels, a citizen of the State of California; The American Sugo,r
Refining Company, a corporation created under the laws of New
Jersey, and having its principa.l place of business in the city of Jersey
City, in the sa,id State; and John E. Sea.des, Jr., a citizen of the
State of New York.
·
·
Defendants.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
}
. .
EASTERN DxsTiUCT OF PENNSYLVANIA. SS• .
Pleas and Proceedings before the Honorable the Judges of the Circuit
Court of the United States in and for the Eastern Dist,rict of Pennsyl-(2)
Vania., in the rrhird Circuit of April Sessions, 1892. No. 38.
It is thus contained:
,
· Be it remembered, that on the 2d day of May, A. D. 1892, the
United Str.ttes of America, by its Solicitors, Robert Ralston, Esquire,
and Bllery P. Ingham, Esquire, come into our Court here and file its
bill of complaint against E. C. Knight Company, et al., '\Yhich being read,
i.s in the following words and figures, to wit. :
·
2
lJNlTED STAT1~Si OF AMEIUCA VS. l~. C. KNIGIIT CO., ET AL,
(3)IN TIIE CIRCUIT louRT OF THE UNITED STA'rES FOB
THE EASTERN DISTIUCT OF PENNSYLVANIA.
AP,,ril Sessfons, 1892.
No. 38.
Between
THE lJNr.rED STATES OF A.arnRICA,
Complainant,
and
E. C. KNIGHT COMPAN1!', Spreckeis' Sugar Refining Company, Franklin
Sugai· Refining Comp'µny, Delawar~ Sugar House, all of which said
defendants are a corpqration incorporated under the laws of Pennsylva-.
nia, an<l having the~r princip:~l places of business in the ~ity of
Philadelphia, in the '~aid State; Edward C. .Knight, Edward C.
Knight, Jr., Thomas \)ochran, l<'rederick D. Langenheim, Richard E.
Clay, Geor9e Frankl~n Davis. Edward l.~rowning, C. A. Spreckels,
Louis Sprecirnls, Pete~ A. Smith, Charles ·watson, Charles O. Harri·
son, William W. Fraiier, Alfred C. Harrison, William II. Harrison,
George H. Frazier, J,~ Vaughn .Merrick, \V. H. Merrick, JohnE.
Cope, John DirkbeckJ citizens of the State of Pennsylvania; Claus
Spreekels, a citizen of11 the State of California; The American Sugar
Refining Company, a!. corporation created under the laws of New
Jersey, and having its!principal place.of business in the city of Jersey
City, in the said State'i; and .John E. Searles, Jr., a citizen of the
State of New York,
Defendants.
(4) To the llonora.ble tlte Jur;ges of the said Oourt:
The U~ited States of 4,merica, by Ellery P. Ingham, Esq., its attor·
ne.v, brings this> its bill of complaint, and comes and resp-Mtfully rep·
rt•sents:
1. That he is the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of
Pennsyh·ania, and that, he is informed and believes, that defendants
herein named have violated the provisions of an Act of Congress ap·
proved July 2d~ 1890, cliapter 647 ( 26 Sat. at Large, 209), entitled
"An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and
monopolies," providing that every contruct. combination in the form of
trust or othcrwisC>, or conspiracy in restraint of trade and comme1:ce
among the several States is illegal. arid that pe1'sons who shall monopolize
01· a.ttempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with other persons to
UNlTlm STATES OF A.\rnRICA YS. E. c. JC\'IGIJT co., l>T AL.
3
monopolize trade or commerce a.mong the several States shall be guiltv of
a mi~dcrneanor; that the Circuit Courts of the United StMes have jt;risdiction to prevent and restrain violations of the said Act.. It is further
averred that your orator upon tbe 11th day of April, 1892, recei\'ctl in~
structions from the Attorney-General to institute these proceedings
in equity to prevent and restrain the violation of tbe said Act as herein·
after set out.
:?. Your orator is iu formed, avers and believes that the above-nu med
defendants. Edward C. Knight, Edward C. Knight, Jr., Thomas Cochran,
Jfrc<lcrick D, Langenheim, Richa.rd E. Clay, George Franklin Davis,
Edwiird. Browning, C. A. Spreckels, Louis Spreckels, Peter A. Smith,
Ch~l'les 'Watson. Charles C. Harrison, William W. Frazier, Alfred C.
Harri::son, 'William IL Harrison. George II. Frazier, J. Vaughn :\Ierrick;
W. H. Merrick, J'ohn E. Cope, an<l John .Birkbeck, are citizens ot the
the city of I~hilade1phia, in the State of Pennsylvania, and tha.t the
above-named defendant, Claus Spreckels, is a. citizen of the State of
California.
3. Your orator hi informed, avers and believes that the above-nu.med
defendant, the American Sugar Refining Company, is a corporation in~
corporntetl .under and by virtue of I the provisions of the Act of the (5)
Legislature of New Jersey, entitled '•An Act concerning corporations,"
approved April 7th, 18i5, and the several supplements thereto and
amendatoty thereof. 'That its certificate of incorpora.tion filed on or
about 9th ,January, 1891, declares its na.me to be The American Sugar
Refining Company. That the place in New Jersey where its business is
to be conducted is Jersey City, in the County of Hudson, in which th~
principal part of its business in said State is to be transacted. 'l'bat the
principal place of busine.ss out of the said State is to be in the city of
Brooklyn, county of Kings. in the State of New York. That the ~tates
of i\laine, Ma.ssachnsett~, .Connecticut, New Yorki Pennsylvania, Louisiana, i\Jis'>OUri, California, and nfaryland are the other States in the
United States in which it proposes to carry on operations; and that the
objects for which ~aid company is formed are the purchase, manufacture,
refining and sale of st?gar, molasses and melads. and aH lawful bu~iness
incidllntal thereto. 'l'llat the business which i8 to be carried on out of
the said State, is a part of the purch:tse, manufactl1re, refining a.nd sale
of sugar, molasses and melads, and all the lawful business incidental
thereto That the total amount of the ca,pital stock of said company is
$500,000.000, divided into five hundred thousand shares of the par value
of $100 dollars each, one-half general and one-half prefened.
4. It is further averred that the B. O. Knight Company is a. corporation incorporated un<ler an Act of the Genera} Assembly of tht) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, entitled •'An Act to provide for the incoryoration an(l regular.ion of certain corporations:' approved April 29th,
18 I ·l, and the supplements thereto. That its certificate of incorporatioil,
fl!e~ on or about August 15th, 1884, dcc}ares its name to be E. C.
l\mg~t Company; that it is formed for the purpose of importing, rnl\nufactnrrng, 1~efining and dealing in suga,r~ antl rno}as.scs, and that its busi-
UNITED STATBS ~F AMERICA VS. E. C. KNIGHT CO., KT AL.
4
ness is to betransactediJthe Cityof Philade1phia; that the amount ofira
capital stock is $~Uo,ooq, di\!'ided into eight thousand shares of the par
value of $100.
· · i
·
(6) . 5. }tis further a~erre~r that t~e s~id defendant, th.e Franklin s.ug_a.r
·
Refining Company, is a 1corporat10n mcorporated un<le: an 4-ct of tile
General Assembly of the'1 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania., entitled ''An
.Act to provide for the i~icorporation and regulation of certain corpora.
tions," approvetl April ~9th, 1874, and the several supplements thereto.
'l'hat it~ certificate of incqrporation filed on or about February 12th, 1890,
declares its name to· be t~c Franklin Sugar Refining Company; that itis
formed for the pm·pose of the manufacture of sugar and the· purchase of
raw material for that puri1ose; that its business is to be transacted in the
City of l'hiladelphia; th~t the amount of its capital stock is $5,000,000,
divided into fifty thousan~ shares of the par value of $100.
It is fu1.·ther averred, that the said defendant, Spreckels' Sngar Re·
fining Company, is a cor~oration incorporated under a,n Act of the Gen·
eral A~ser.nbly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,, entitled "An Act
to provide for the incorpo'tation and regulation of certain corporations/'
approved 29th April, 187]1, and the supplements thereto. That its cer·
tificate of incorporation, filed on or nbout Juno 9th. 1890, decla.r~s its
name to be Spreckels' Sugar Refining Comptiny; that it is .formed for
the purpose of refining sul~ar, which will involve the buying the raw ma·
terfol'thercfor and selling!the manufactm·ed prod11ct1 and of doing wha~
ever else sliaU be incidental to the sa.id business of refining; that its bus1·
ness is ~o be transacted i~ Philadelphia; that tbe a.moui1t of its capital
stock is $5,000,00(), divid~<l into fifty thousand shares of the par value
of $100.
'
i
·
. 7. It is further averre4 that the said defendant, the Delaware ~·ugar
House, is :i corporation in~orporated by letters pa.tent issued hy the Governor of the Commonwealt~1 of Pennsylvania under and by virtue of ~n Act
~f the General A~semhlyj of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvama, ap·
proved ~9th April, 186~J, entitled "Supplement . to an Act relating to
corporations for mecl1am~l, manufacturing, mining and qun.rrying pur· .
poses, :tppr-0Yed 18th July,: 1863," under which the Governor of the Com·
(7) monwP.ahh of Penns1lvani'p. was authorized I and rcq11ired to issue le~ters
Ratent to all co.mpanies forme~l 1mder the prov)siona of an ~ct en~1~led
. An Act relutmg to corporations for mechanical' manufacturm<r, mmwg
qnarryin[S purposes," approved 18th July, 1863. That its ~ertificate
~f mcorporat1on, urion which the said letters patent were issued, fil~d on
or al)out. October 19th, 1868, declares its 11ame to be the Delaware Sug11r
House; that it is ~ormed for the purpose of the manufaGture of sugar and
~yrups an<l preparing the same for market and the transaction of such
woi·k 01· busines~ as may be t)ecessary or pr~p<~r for the proper manage·
!11ent of the business o~ ~a.nufacture; that the amount of its capital stock
is. fixed nt ~D6,000, d1v1ded into tiinety·six shares of the par value of
$1000 each.
·
'
6.
an?
· 8. You1· orator is informed, avers and believes that the said defendants,
E_. C. Knight Company, Spreckels' Sugitr .Refining Company, Franklin
UNITED SIA.TES
OF .A.MERICA
5
VS. E. C. KNIGHT CO., ET AL.
~ ·· .. R. fi · Company 1md the Delaware Sugar H ouse, all nnd each
.,uaar e nmg
.
·1
b t 111 h
of ~bem were from the time of their. incorpora.t1on unti on or a o.u ;1 :lfc
4th, 1892, independently engaged m the. manufactu~e and ~ale of refined
· ·· Th."t the product of their refineries amounted to tlurty·thrce per
sugar..
"'
.
l . h U . d S
Th a,t
cent. of the total amount of sugar refine< . m t e mte . tates. .
thev were competitors with the said AmE>ncan Su_gar Hefinrng Compn.ny
arid with one anotl1er in the said business of refi mn~ sn.gar, and tha.t the
products of their several . refineries were ~old and d1str_1bu ted ~;m?ng t~e
several States of the Umted States, and that all the sa1cl c~ru p'.tni es. w.et ~
in trade or commerce with t he several States a.nu witl1 forelgn.
en 0oraaed
0
nations.
Tho said defendant, the .American Sugar Refining Company, as appears br its certificate of incorporation heretofore referred to, was formeu
for the.purpose of doing business in the states of New. Jersey, ~\fainc,
Mi!lsouri, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania., I"ouis1ana., :\Inryhnd,
California and Massachuset ts. The said company. by means of various
contracts and agreements bad on and prior to 4th ~l:lrch , 189Z, ohtaine~
the control fif all the sugar refineries in the States of New J nsey. New
York, Massachusetts, Maryland, L\li~souri, j Louisiana and California; (8)
and with the exception of the Hevere Sugar R efinery, of B oston. :\Ia.ss. ,
and the refineries .belonging to the said four defend:ints in Philadel phja,
o':ne<! or controlled all the sugar refi neries in the United Stittes. The
sa1ti I.evere Sugar Refinery, of Boston, produced annually about two per
ce~t. of the total amount of sugar refined . in tlie United States. The
saul four defendants produced annually about thirty-three per cent. of the
to~id amouut of sugar refined in the United Btates. In order that the
satd dcfondant, the American Sugar Refining Companv, mio-ht obtain
con:plete control of the prodll.ction and price of 1'efine~l Sll<far in the
United. States, they, the said American Su(l'ar fl etini1v,. Co1~pany unJ.
Jolm E. S"'arles, Jr., mitered into an unhwfttl an<l frnud~Jent sd1eme to
~·l~chase the stock, mucbincr_y and real estate of t he s.:i.id defendants, by
th~idi ~be! attempted to obtnin tbe control of nll the sugar refineries in
St 8• <hstrict for the purpose of_ restraining the tra<le thereof witl1 other
j~es :~ theretofore ~~rr1~d on mtlepen~ently by the saitl defendant:~<.
fonda~ juance of th1s su1<.I unlawful and fraudulent scheme the said de- ·)
· t.. ohn E. Searles, Jr., on or about i\fa.1·ch 4th 1892 ent"1·e·l 1·nto'
a contract ·th h
· d
·
'
" '·
. I1t J rWl'.I'h t e said
Edward c· Knight• E'd·
c·•
Kn1"
C h efontfants,
.,
, \\"'r,l
·~ ,1
Clay Geor~ F~ma~ . oc . rnr;, Ii rederick. D. Laugenheim, Riclia.r<l E.
Coro' a !:le . ~an~lin Davis, Edwa.rd Browning. and E. C. Kni ht
COnsi~le~~;i!~ :rh~~h ~ fas ag~ced ,that the said ,John E. Seurle~. Jr.~
The Am~rican Sur~e e ivery >J., him of $2.050,000 of the stock of saiJ
ferret! and-0ue-haJf~r Refining C<Jmpa?y-one-half of the said stock p.re.
to demand of th c.ommon- to the said <l.efcndants, should have the rio-h t
the s.1id E C T?e ~al1d dCefend.ant3 the delivery to him of all t he stockoQ.f
'· · an 11r it ,om pa
· 1·
.
·
ery, real estate &l:) b
. ny, or in '?u thereof the t•efinery, umchin·,
1·
' c., .. de1ongm"t:> to the said E • C• I'~l.lllg
· h t cow
· pan
· y · and
" pursuance of th
John E. Searles j sa~ 9c;>3tlact the said defendants delivered to th~ said
Knight Company ~~d· v s.dinrJeshof the, capital stock of the said E. C.
.
. '
e sai 0 n E. Searles, Jr., delivered to the said
in
th
.~
t::S-lTED STATES ~t' A:\fERICA VS. E. C. KNI91I~ CO., ET AL.
defon~ants ~ large num?er of the shares of the capital stoc~ of' the said
American Sugar Refining Company. the amount thereof bemg to. y:mr
orator unknown:
;
·
· ,
(9) And as part of the s~jd fraudulent and unlawful scheme, the said
, defendant, John E. Seark'S, .Tr., on or about March 4, 1.892, entered
into a contract with the said . defendants, Claus Spreckels, C. A.
Spreckels. Louis Spreck~ls, Peter A. Smith, Charles \Vatson, and
Spreckels' Suo-ar Refining Company, by which it was agreed that the
said defendant:' John E. Searles, Jr, in consideration of the delivery by
him to the said defend:i.nt~ of a large a.mount of the capital stock of the
American Sugar Refininni Company, which snid amount is unknown to
your orator, should have ~,he right to demand of the said defenu<1.nts the
delivery to bim of all th~ stock of the said Spreckels' Sugar Refining
Company, or in lieu theijeof the refinery, machinery, real estate, etc,
belonging to the said coyppanv. And thereafter, in pursuance of the
said udawful and fraudul<!-nt contract, the said defendants did deliver all
the stock of the said Sp!reckcls' Sugar Refining Company to the sa.id
John E. Searles, Jr., and the said John E. Searles, Jr. did deliver to the
said defendants a large ~mount of the capital stock of the Am<.'rican
Sugar Refining Company,! which amount is to your orator unknown.
And as part ~f the s~id fraudulent and unlawful scheme, the said
defendant, John E. Searl~s, Jr., on or about March 4, 1892, entered
into a contract with the Said defondanti<, Charles C. Harrison, William
,V. · Frazier. Alfred 0. Harrison, \Villiam IL Harrison, George H.
Frazier and the Frankli~ Sucrar Hefinincr Company, by which it was
agreed that the said deforidant,~John E. S~rles, Jr., in consideration of
the delivery by him to tlte said defendants of a. larue amount of the
capital stock of the Am~rican Su,,ar Refinin!1' Coru°pany, which said
amount is unknown to yo~1r orator, ~bould have"!> the ri{l'ht to demand of
the said defendants the deliverv to him of all the stock of the said
:Fran~din Sugar Refiningj Company, <>r in lieu thereof t11e refinery,
mach1~ery. real estate, etc~, belonging to the said company. And ther~·
after, m pursuance of the said unlawfol and fraudulent contract, the said
defendants did deliver all ~he stock of the said Franklin Su<rar Refining
(10) Comp~ny,to, the said I Johp E. Searles, Jr., and tl1e said Joh~ E. Sear~es,
,Jr., did uehver to the s:iild defendants a lar"'e amount of the cup1ta.l
stock of the American S!ugar Refining Company, which amount is to
your orator nn1mown.
',
And as part of the sdid fraudulent and unlawful scheme, the said
defendant, John E. Searles, Jr., on or about March 4. 1892, entered
into ~ CQntract with the said defendants, J. Vaughn :Merrick, ·w. II.
:Merr1~k, John E Cope, John Birkbeck and the Defo.ware Su{!'ar: House,
by ~h1eh ~twas agreed that the said defendant. John E. Searles, Jr., in
consideration of the delivery by him to the said defendants of a large
am?uut ?f the capit.al sfock of the American Sugar Refining Company,
which stud aruou~t 1s unknown to your orator, should have the right to
d~mand of the said defendants the delivery to him of all the stock of the
said Delaware Sugar H?use, or in lieu thereof the r(ionery, machinery,
real estate, etc., belongmg to the said company. And thereafter, m
. UNITED ST.ATES OR A?4Elt!OA
vs.
E.
c_
•. KNIGH~ . co.,
El' AL.
1
ursua.nce of the said unlawful an~ fr8:udulent contract, the s11i<l Jefen4~nis did deliver all the stock. of the ~a.id Delaware Sugar Hou~o to .the
6aid John E. Searles, J r., and the €-aid .John E •.Searles, Jr.• did dehv~r
to the said defendants a large amo~nt of the ~ap1 tal stock of the Amer1 ·
can Sugar Refining Company, which amount is to your ora_tor unknown.
9. Your orator is informed, avers and believes that in the. carrying
out 'or the said unlawful and fraudulent scheme and in the making of the
aaid contracts the said defendant, John E. Searles, Jr., was aGting for
and in behalf of the said defendant, the Am erican Sugar Refining Coul~
pany, and that the said American Sugar Refining Company was the real
party to the said contracts and received all the benefit of the same a nd
pa.id the consideration thereof, and that the said contracts were made by
the said Amerienn Sugar R efining. Company and the otber parties defendant herein named for the purpose of enabling it, the said American
Sugar Refining Company, to control the manufacture and price of sugar
in this district and to limit the production and enhance the I price of the (11)
same and to restrain the trade in the said commodity by and between
the State of Pennsylvania and the other States of the United States and
'll'ith foreign nations.
10. And your orator is informed, avers and believes that the ·said
defendant, the Amedcan Sugar Refining Company, monopolizes the
manufacture and sale of refined sugar in the United States and is
enabled to control at ~ill the price of the .said sugar, and doe~ control
~n~_regula.te the price of refined sugar in the United States ; that it has
limited the production .and increased the price of said sugar, and to that
sud has stopped and d1srnantled many refineries throucrhout the united
tates. That the said contracts heretofore referred
were part and
krcel ?f a. fraudulent and unlawful scheme to enable the said company ·
we~:tam t~e c?ntr~] of the.productior and pric~ of r~fined. sugar, and
th 1mJ1~ations in restraint of trade, and that m makm11 said contractS
881
o n ~· Sea.rlea, Jr., and the said American gugar Refininu
eo:~ny ~mbmed ~nd conspire~ 'vith the said defendants, E. C. Knight
C P ny, i..:: preck.els Sugar Refinmg Company, F ranklin Su!!<'\,r U.efinin
J:~~rh!~ Del ware Sugar H ou.se, Edward C. Knight, Edward c. Knigh~
George F:nkli~chnn'. FrE~erick D. La~genheim, Richard E. Clay,
Spreckels, Peter A avS, .th ward Browning, C. A. Spreckels, Louis
William W. Frazier. Altm1d C~i1arl?s \Y'~~o~, Charles <?· Harrison,
U_. Frazier, J. Vaughn ;; . ·k \~ri~on, , · lll.1am .H. Ha~r1son, George
n1rkheek and Claus S ~ec~rlic ' . .. I ..i\Ierr1ck, John E. Cope, John .
refined sugar amon
es, t~ restrain th~ trade and commerce in
that the said contr~ts ~ sevedal States and w.1th foreign nations. And
th.e defendants herein nao
e and entere~ into as aforesaid by all of
said, The American S me R wei:e made with the intent to enable the
facture and sale of re~~n:d efinn~g fornpany, to monopolize the manuS~tes of the United St t su.gar l~ ennsylvani.a and among the several
which refined sugar sol; .es > to mcrease the usual rate and prices a.t
-competition at the prices
t~ prevent and counteract the effect of free
e sarne, and thereby to exact and procure
to
C:
0
tif
md
is
of
8
UNITED STATES ~F .A31ERICA
vs.
E.
c.
KNIGHT
co.,
E'r
ArJ.
i
(12) large sums of money I lrom the citizens .'of Pennsylvania and froni tho
citizens of the several States of the United States and fl'.om all other$
purchasing; and tliat tpe said contracts s~ ma.de and entered into as
aforesaid are unlawful a~d contrary to the said Act.
To the end therefore that your orntor may obtn.in the equitable relief
necessary and 'contempl~ted under. t~e p~ovisioI?-8 of the said .~ct approv~<l. July 2~, 1890, apd that an lnJ~nct1?n be . granted. to enJOtn and
proh1bit the said dcfend~nts from the v10lat1ons of the said Act and that
tl1e said defendants may!make full answer under oath .to all the allega•
tions liercin, may it plea\se your Honors to grant your orator a writ of
subpmna to be directed! to each of the sa.id defendants, E. C. Knight
Company, Spreckels' Sugar Refining Company, Frankljn Sugar H.etiuing
Company, Delaware Si~g{!.r House, Edwnrd · C. Knight, Edward C:
Knight, Jr., Thomas Qochrao. Frederick D. Langenheim, .Richard E.
Clay) George Franklin I]>avis, Edward Browning, C. A. Spreckels, Louis
. Spreckels, Peter A Smitip, Charles \Yatson, Charles C. Harrison, 'William
"\V. ]'razier, Alfred 0.1 Harrison, \Yillin.m ·IL Harrison,· George H.
Fraziei-, J. Vaughn M+rrick,
H. .Merrick, John E. Cope, John.
Birkbeck, Claus Spreck~ls, the Amel'ican Sugar Refining Company, and
John E. Searles, Jr., co~11manding them to be and to appear before this
Honorable Court .and thqn and th~re full, true, dir~ct and perfect answer
make to all and smgular.1:the premises.
,V.
And your orator prayJ especially:-
Jr
1. That ~H and each the said unlawful agreements made and entered
into hy and between the ~aid defendants, on or about the fourth day of
March, 1892. shall be d~livered up, cancelled, and declared. to be void;
(13) and that the said <fofend~nts, the Ameri* I can Sugar Refining Company
and John }~. Searles, Jr.~ he ordered to deliver to the other said defendants r;spectively th? shares of stock received by them in performance of
the siud contracts; and that the other said defendants be oi·dered to .<fo,
liver to t~e said defenda4ts, tbe American ·su~r Refining Company. and
?ohn E. Searles, Jr., the, sQares of stock recen~d by them respectively
m performance of the ~aiid contracts.
.
. ..
.
2 ..That an injunctfon.I issue 'P~elimin~ry u'ntil the final determination
of. this cause, and perpefual thereafter, preyenting and restrainintf .the
said defe~dands from the! further performance of the terms and cond1t1ons
of the said unlawful agreements. ·
8. That an injunction may issue preventing and restraining the said
defendants from fu.rther and continued violations of the said Act of Congress, approved July 2d, 1890.
'
4. ·Such. other and further relier as equity a~d justfoe may require in
the premises. · . . _. ,
.
And he will ever pray.
ELLERY
May 2d, 1892.
P. INGHAM,
.
United States Atto-rney.
UNIT.Im STATES OF .AMERICA vs. E. c. KNIGII'r co., ET AL.
b .
d. l
9
orn according to law, doth depose and
Ellery P..Ingham, emg u yd syrn the foregoing bill of complaint, and
th t he 18 the person name 1
d b }'
·:~t thae facts therein stated are true as he is informed an e ieves.
ELLERY P. INGHAM.
· Sworn to and subscribed before me, this second day· of ~fay, A. D .,
1892.
SA.MUEr. IlELL,
United States Gommiasioner.
ROBERT RALSTON,
Assistant United States Attorney.
ELLERY P. INGHAM,
United States Attorney,
For Complainant.
(14)
Endorsed.
No. 38. April Sessions! 1892. In the Circuit Court of the United
States, for the Eastern District of Pcnusylvania. In Equity. Between
The United Stat<.'S of America., Complainant, and E. 0. Knight Company, Spreckels' Sugar Refining Company. Franklin Sugar Hefining
Company, .Delaware Sugar House, all of which said defendants are corporaiions incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania, and having their
principal places of business in the city of Philadelphia, in th~ said State;
Edward C. Knight, Edward <J. Knight, Jr., Thomas Cochran Frederick
D. Langenheim, Richard E. Clay, George :Franklin Davis, Edward
Browning, C. A. Spreckels, Louis Spreckels, Peter A. Smith, Charles
Watson, Charles C. Harrison, William \V. Frazier, Alfred C. Htifrison,
Willi~m IL Harrison, George ·H. 'Frazier, J. Vaughn :M.errick, \V. II.
Me:rick, John E. Cope, John Birkbeck, citizens of the State of PennsylyamaJ Claus Sp:eckels, a citizen of the State of California.; The Ameri~an "ugar Refinmg Company, a corporation created. under the laws of
New Je~ey, .and hav:ing its principal place of business in the city of
~ersey City, l\the said State; and John E. Searles, Jr., a citizen of the
tate o~ New ~ ork, D~fendants.
ROBERT RALSTON,
Assistant United States Attorney.
ELLERY P. ING HA:rt1,
Filed May 2d, 1892.
United States Attorney,
Fo-r Oornplainant.