as they have been prevented from so doing by the unlawful acts of defendants hereinafter described, have been engaged in trade and commerce among the several states of the United States within the meaning of the Act of Congress approved July 2, 1890, entitled "An Act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies."

And the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do further present that said Michael Boyle [names of defendants repeated], on the seventh day of May, 1913, in the city of Chicago in said Eastern Division of said Northern District of Illinois, unlawfully did knowingly enter into and make a certain contract in restraint of trade and commerce so being carried on by said concerns, corporations and firms located in states other than the state of Illinois, in this indictment above mentioned, that is to say, all of said defendants then and there made a contract between themselves whereby said defendants and said local unions and the members thereof, acting through their said officers and agents, severally agreed to and did hinder, restrain and prevent the installation in the eity of Chicago of any electrical appliances not manufactured by the members of said Association in said city of Chicago, and agreed to and did hinder, restrain and prevent the installation of any electrical appliances manufactured in states other than the state of Illinois, and consequently agreed to and did hinder, restrain and prevent the interstate trade in electrical appliances of said concerns, corporations and firms located in states other than the said state of Illinois; and the method by which defendants and said local unions, and the members thereof, agreed to and did hinder, restrain and prevent the installation of electrical appliances manufactured in states other than the state of Illinois was that said defendants, officers and agents of said Local 134, and said members of said Local 134, were to and did refuse to install, and were to and did refrain from installing such electrical appliances manufactured in states other than the state of Illinois, and all of said defendants, and particularly said defendants, officers and agents of said local unions, and certain members of said local unions whose names are to the said grand jurors unknown, were to and did prevent by force and violence the in

DEMURRER TO INDICTMENT UNDER SHERMAN ACT

[FORM 2

stallation by persons other than members of such Local 134 of electrical appliances manufactured in states other than the state of Illinois; said contract of April 1, 1911, being in part evidenced by a document which is set forth in the eighth count of this indictment, entitled "Articles of Agreement", dated April 1, 1911, and which is referred to and incorporated in this count as fully as if herein repeated; said contract of April 1, 1912, being in part evidenced by a document which is set forth in the eighth count of this indictment entitled "Articles of Agreement", dated April 1, 1912, and which is referred to and incorporated in this count as fully as if herein repeated; and said contract of May 7, 1913, being in part evidenced by a document which is set forth in the eighth count of this indictment, entitled "Articles of Agreement", dated May 7, 1913, and which is referred to and incorporated in this count as fully as if herein repeated.

And so the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, do say that said Michael Boyle [names repeated], at the time and place aforesaid, in the manner and form aforesaid, unlawfully did knowingly enter into and make a contract in restraint of trade and commerce among the several states; against the peace and dignity of the said United States, and contrary to the form of the statute of the same in such case made and provided. CHARLES F. CLYNE,

FORM NO. 2

United States Attorney.

Demurrer to Indictment under Sherman Act.

Boyle v. United States, 259 Fed. 803 (C. C. A. 7th Cir.).

DEMURRER

And now comes the defendant James Obermiller, by Joseph Z. Klenha, and John F. Tyrrell, his attorneys, comes and demurs to the indictment heretofore filed against him in the above entitled cause, and to each and every count thereof, and says that the same is not sufficient in law for him, the said defendant, James Obermiller, to be required to plead unto, and that each and every count thereof is defective, uncertain, insufficient, vague and indefinite in the following particulars:

For that the said charge of conspiracy fails to show or allege that this defendant was a party thereto within three years next prior to and preceding the return of the indictment herein.

For that the said indictment fails to allege any fact or facts showing the formation or creation of a conspiracy.

For that the said indictment fails to allege any fact or facts showing that trade was restrained, commerce interfered with or any act done to hinder trade or commerce.

For that the alleged conspiracy does not show facts sufficient to bring the same within the provisions of any statute of the United States of America.

For that the alleged conspiracy relates solely to matters exclusively within the jurisdiction of the laws of the State of Illinois, and not within the inhibition of any Statutes of the laws of the United States of America.

For that there is no sufficient showing of unlawful means or the commission of any overt act by this defendant.

For that there is no sufficient allegation or showing of commencement or object of the alleged conspiracy.

For that there is no showing of any agreement, contract, combination, or conspiracy to which the defendant is by any sufficient allegation charged as a party or principal.

For that there is no sufficient showing of the relation of the defendant to the "association" or "union" mentioned to connect or charge him with the alleged conspiracy.

For that the said acts charged in the said indictment have no relation to or connection with Inter-State Commerce, or made unlawful by the Statute of the United States of America.

For that the attempted statements or alleged recitals of fact

DEMURRER TO INDICTMENT UNDER SHERMAN ACT

[FORM 2 seeking or attempting to show the connection or relation of this defendant with an alleged conspiracy, are statements or recitals of conclusions of law.

For that the alleged wrongful acts, combination or conspiracy, were not done, formed or threatened or intended as to any matter of commerce or trade, but if existed or were done, they related to matters which were part of the jurisdiction of, and within the police powers of the State of Illinois.

For that the said alleged unlawful combination, contract, or conspiracy as shown by the said indictment related not to articles of trade and commerce as such, but to such as was made by non-union labor wheresoever made, and while they were such articles within the State of Illinois, they were not subject to the power of the United States of America under the authority to regulate and control commerce; and was in pursuance of the Articles of Agreement made for that purpose and as set forth in part of said indictment.

For that said alleged conspiracy is not shown to have been continuous conspiracy, or to have existed within three (3) years next preceding and prior to the day and date of the return of said indictment herein; any statement or attempted recital attempting to show that it was a continuous conspiracy is a statement of a conclusion and is refuted and nullified by the other allegations in said indictment contained.

For that said indictment does not show any contract or agreement connecting the defendant James Obermiller with the same in violation of law.

For that the said indictment does not fully show the alleged contracts or agreements and the parts thereof do not show any unlawful combination, contract or confederation in force and effect within three years last past next preceding the day and date of the return of said indictment.

For that said indictment does not show that this defendant James Obermiller is a party or principal to any unlawful contract, combination, confederation or conspiracy.

For that the said indictment does not sufficiently state or allege any specific or general act showing that the defendant did engage in, become a party to, or principal in any unlawful

21

contract, agreement, conspiracy, combination or confederation.

For that the said indictment does not allege any fact or facts showing that the defendant James Obermiller engaged in, was a party to or principal in, any combination, confederation or conspiracy in restraint of trade or to hinder the same; nor the time, place or manner thereof.

For all of which causes of demurrer existing as to each and every count of said indictment, this defendant, James Obermiller, says that each and every count thereof is and are demurrable and not sufficient in law to make plea unto.

Wherefore, he prays that said indictment and each and every count thereof as to him, the said James Obermiller, defendant herein, be quashed, and that he go hence without date.

JOSEPH Z. KLENHA,

JOHN F. TYRRELL,

Attorneys for Defendant, James Ober

miller, Impleaded.

FORM NO. 3

Demurrer Sherman Act.

Boyle v. United States, 259 Fed. 803 (C. C. A. 7th Cir.).

United States of America,

Northern District of Illinois, SS.

Eastern Division.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

For and in Said District and Division.

The United States of America

And the defendant, Michael Boyle, by Edward R. Litzinger, his attorney, comes and demurs to the said indictment and to each and every count thereof, and says, that the same is not sufficient in law for him, Michael Boyle, to plead unto, and that each count is so defective, uncertain and unsufficient in the particulars following: