r
ftje 10
The
Anti-Trust
Is It* crime to give peo]
For 90 y^ari A&P hu i
For many months now 1
papers, making speech*
They have been makinj
give its customers bettc
We have already told
were proved utterly fa]
In the left-hand column
two cases.
Now we are going to tell
What Has Gone Before
Today's ad is the third in a series telling
about times the anti-trust lawyers made
serious and damaging charges against A&P
that the courts decided were not true.
In the first ad in this series we told you about the time
the anti-trust lawyers charged that AficP, and other
* j *1? ?c
food American citizens, conspirea 10 ha mc p**v*. w.
bread in Washington.
These charges were false.
That was the time Federal Judge T. Alan
Goldsborough instructed the jury to bringin
a verdict of "not guilty".
It was the time he said to the anti-trust lawyers:
"// you were to show this record to any
experienced trial lawyer in the world,
he would tell you that there wag not any
r evidence at all.
"Honestly, I have never in my over forty
yean? experience seen tried f case that
worn as absolutely devoid of evidence
am this. That is the honest truth. / have
I-'I Za 99
never seen one hkv u.
Bat that was not the only time the anti-trust lawyers
madr such serious "allegations" against A&P which
wui false.
In our second ad we told you about the time
in Wilson, North Carolina, they charged
A&fs fresh fruit and vegetable buying subsidiary,
and other good American citizens,
with conspiring to fix and depress prices
paid farmers for potatoes in North Carolina,
Virginia and Maryland.
Here again, as in the Washington bread case? the charges
were false.
This was the time Federal Judge C. C.
Wyche directed the jury to bring in a verdict
of "not guilty".
It was the time he said to the anti-trust lawyers:
44I have studied this case from the very
outset. In my opinion there is no testimony
produced from which it can reasonably
be inferred that the defendants
entered into a combination to depress
or lower the price of potatoes.
"/ might say that I never tried a case in
my life where a greater effort, more
work, more investigation had been
done, combing almost with a fine-tooth
comb to gather evidence, as was done
> in this case.
"Bat, a? was taid a long time ago, yoa
can't make brick without straw, and
yoa can't make a com* without fact*"
So here were two caiet in which the anti-trust lawyers
made seriously damaging charges against A&P, in which
the judge decided that there were no facts to support
those charges.
[
Today, we want to tell you about the third
time?this time in Dallas, Texas?the court
decided against the anti-trust lawyers.
t
<
THE SYLVA HERALD AND RURAL ITE
Third Time'
i w?
LaWJfCIS TV c
pie more gooid fooH for their mdney?
devoted *11 its energies to this end.
the anti-trust lawyers from Washington have been giving i
>s and talking over the radio about this company.
g serious and damaging allegations about the methods tl
x food values. ,
you about other times the anti-trust lawyers made char]
Ise in court.
i on this page you can read what the federal judges had
you about the third time a federal judge decided against th<
TL. n.ll_. A ?
i ne uanas /in
In 1942 the anti-trust lawyers went out to Dallas,
Texas, 1*400 miles from the homes of most of
the defendants, and instigated criminal charges
against A&P.
About this case one thing was sure.
Their previous experience did not deter the anti-trust lawyers
from making more inflammatory and damaging allegations,
just as they had done before.
They made practically the same allegations they
are making today.
Federal Judge W. H. Atwell ruled that the case should not
even be tried. He said that the indictment contained inflammatory
statements that he would not permit to be presented
to a jury.
Judge Atwell said to the anti-trust lawyers:
"If I thought I was presiding over a court and
that I might have to sentence some person
because he was a great big fellow, or because
he was a Lilliputian, I would feel like resigning.
Cod knows we don't want it ever to occur
in America that the size is going to determine
whether a man is guilty or innocent"
I
Everything that has happened since this suit w.? filed
destroyed.
A deluge of letters from people in all walks of life
magazines convince us that the public has faith in A
The housewives of this nation, whose patronage has
increasing numbers and increasing volume.
Our suppliers, whom the anti-trust lawyers allege we
Labor leaders, mindful of the fact that A&P empl
conditions, are taking a stand against the suit.
Even many of our good competitors, who the anti-t
have taken ads to tell the public that they don't lil
AH this indicates that the American people realize tl:
efficiency, against low prices and against real comp
Apparently most Americans do not want to let the a
1 1 _ L i> 1 ' *
on any businessman wno aoes a oeiter ana more ei
No one can make them believe it is a crime to try to se
VflL
THE GREAT ATLANTIC &
?L
Thursday, Feb. 9, 1950
fhe
re Wrong!
itories to the news*
lat enable A&P to
\
res against us that
to say about those 1
s anti-trust lawyers.
*
ti-Trust Suit
Judge Atwell also said to the anti-trust lawyers:
"If the indictment is not good then it is better
to find out before an expensive trial than it is
after an expensive trial. I do not think it
is good, and thinking that, it is my duty to
sustain the demurrers and motion to quash."
In short, Federal Judge Atwell threw the anti- \
trust lawyers and their case right out of his court#
So that makes three times that the anti-trust lawyers made
damaging allegations against A&P. In two of these cases 4
federal judges said they were all wrong. In the third case a
federal judge said that the indictment was inflammatory and
he would not even permit the case to be tried.
The anti-trust lawyers were not satisfied with the , Dallas
decision.
Neither were they satisfied with the two other decisions in
which federal courts administered stinging rebukes to them*
They were still determined to destroy A&P.
In our next ad we will tell you how they con*
tinued their campaign in this case in the Circuit
Court of Appeals and subsequent proceedings.
We will show you how, once again, they disagreed
with the courts.
A
proves that the American people don't want A&P
s and thousands of editorials in newspapers and
&P. ,
made this company big, are buying from us in ,
have exploited, are rushing to our support.
A
oyees enjoy the best wages, hours and working
rust lawyers allege are hurt by our competition,
Ice this attack on A&P.
tat the suit to destroy A&P is really a suit against
etition.
nti-trust lawyers in Washington blow the whistle
licient job and grows big in the process.
11 the best quality food at the lowest possible price*
Pi
1
I
PACIFIC TEA COMPANY '
*