Torino, 18 novembre 1909 (Mantovani e. C. c. Rosenthal, Fleischer & Co). 597 599 599 CORTE D'APPELLO (COURTS OF appeal). Catania, 29 dicembre 1911 (Narcisi c. Idonia).......... Milano, 11 ottobre 1907 (Barbareschi c. Heimann) 600 599 600 600 Milano, 19 novembre 1907 (Van Baerle e C. c. Heiman e C.) 599 Milano, 1 febbraio 1911 (Industria Italiana dei Disinfettanti c. Brioschi) 600 275 Napoli, 27 novembre 1905 (Fratelli Branca c. Fratelli Branca fu Carlo e C.)... 601 599 Torino, 15 maggio 1912 (Consorzio Agrario Cooperativo di Torino c. Martin 598 TRIBUNALI (TRIBUNALS). Milano, 3 luglio 1900 600 Venezia, 14 aprile 1904 (Società Salviati Jesurum C. L. c. Ditta Pauly e C.) .. 276, 598 Parma, 25 febbraio 1910 (Soc. fornai e pastai c. Finella) 275 THE NETHERLANDS. HOOGE RAAD (SUPREME COURT). Beslissing van 6. April 1883 (J. C. Elzer tegen P. L. de Gavere). 607 Beslissing van 29. Juni 1883 (J. C. Cornelissen tegen H. W. Reuter). 607 Beslissing van 6. Jan. 1905 (J. J. B. Ivens, jr. tegen De naamlooze venootschap 608 LOWER COURTS. Amsterdam, 13. Juni 1899... 608 Amsterdam, 7. Juni 1910 (Bond van Nederlandsch Grossiers in Fruit tegen A. Rotterdam, 11. Nov. 1909, Arbitrale Uitspraken (van Deventer tegen Maseland en N. V. Zuid-Hollandsche Glasblazerij).. 283 Kievskii Okruzhnyi Soud, 13. marta 1895 (Otchet po delu sindikata sakharoza- Petrikovskii Okruzhnyi Soud, marta 1909 (Glue Manufacturers). SPAIN. TRIBUNAL SUPREMO (SUPREME COURT). Sentencia de 30 de diciembre de 1907 (Guillermo Llambras Malla). SWITZERLAND. SCHWEIZERISCHES BUNDESGERICHT (SWISS FEDERAL COUrt). Urteil v. 18. Dez. 1891 (Orell Füssli c. Schweizerisches Vereinssortiment) 288 288 288 603 603 612 611 Urteil v. 24. Juni 1911 (Verband nordwestschweizerische Milchgenossenschaften 279 612 279 CANTONAL COURTS. Obergericht Zürich, 12 mai 1894 613 Handelsgericht Bern, 15. Dez. 1913 (Jordi-Kocher und Kons. c. Moses Bernheim)....... 613 LETTERS OF TRANSMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, March 15, 1915. SIR: I transmit herewith a report of the Commissioner of Corporations on Trust Laws and Unfair Competition. This report deals principally with the legislation and judicial decisions of the United States and of the chief foreign countries with respect to industrial combinations and unfair competition. Very respectfully, The PRESIDENT. WILLIAM C. REDFIELD, Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BUREAU OF CORPORATIONS, Washington, March 15, 1915. SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on Trust Laws and Unfair Competition made to the President under your direction, and in accordance with the law creating the Bureau of Corporations. This report deals principally with the legislation and judicial decisions of the United States and of the chief foreign countries with respect to industrial combinations and unfair competition. I desire to mention as especially contributing, under my direction, to the preparation of this report, Messrs. Francis Walker, Adrien F. Busick, Morten Q. Macdonald, E. O. Merchant, William F. Notz, and Ernest S. Bradford, of this Bureau. Very respectfully, To Hon. WILLIAM C. REDFIELD, JOSEPH E. DAVIES, Commissioner of Corporations. Secretary of Commerce. XLIX LETTER OF SUBMITTAL. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BUREAU OF CORPORATIONS, Washington, March 15, 1915. SIR: I have the honor to submit herewith a report on Trust Laws and Unfair Competition. The Bureau first directed its attention to this subject in connection with proposed legislation to supplement the antitrust laws, undertaken by the Sixty-third Congress, in order that it might be able, in so far as desired, to furnish information thereon to the legislative branch of the Government. Furthermore, in connection with the decision of Congress to establish a Federal Trade Commission and to grant to it certain functions regarding unfair methods of competition, the Bureau made a general investigation of the laws regarding such competitive methods. Much information was collected in a form adapted to the purpose in view, and it was thought that it would be useful to the general public. For this reason, therefore, and without presuming to make a dogmatic interpretation of the law, it is deemed advisable to publish this material in the present form. Among the chief subjects discussed are Federal antitrust legislation, the judicial decisions thereunder, and the influence of such legislation on forms of business organization, the antitrust laws of the several States, the legislation of foreign countries with regard to combinations, and the laws and judicial decisions in the United States and various foreign countries with regard to unfair or unlawful competition. EFFECT OF LEGISLATION ON BUSINESS ORGANIZATION. A comparison of the development of antitrust legislation in the United States and its judicial interpretation with the contemporaneous development of the forms of business organization would seem to justify the conclusion that the law has been an important factor in shaping the forms of business organization. For example, while combinations to suppress competition in the form of holding companies were at one time thought by some to be lawful, and at any rate were frequently resorted to, the clear denunciation of this form of monopolistic combination in a decision by the Supreme Court in 1904 substantially put an end to the formation of combinations of |