Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/142

 116 OCTOBIR Tll IFS07. Ammt or Apl 0 U. . low and which, tlt being the ease as reduced, __,s_ a bur- den upon other trsl. The contract is unlawful because it gives an undue prefer- ece to one article of treat (the product) over another article of traffac (live stock), both sxticles beiag in active competition Mr. Cordzn/o A. %verance, with hom Mr.  B. Kd- lo 1 Mr. Rob E. O were on  bfi, for sp,  Gt W wsy y: dln of ft y  ct  od  p on ap  tn   on m. H v. ,  U.S. 1;  v. Gong, 1 U.S. 2;  v.  F, 1 U. 8. 119; t v. Ha, 1 U.S. 14; W v. K, 1 U.S. 7; Crawled v. N, 1 U.S. 5; E v. , 141 U.S. 1.  mnt twn ndent  Gt W way my d vo m w or e i fi W m for bn. Coi v. Gd, 1 U. S. 79; H v. Un , 171 U.S. ; Dre, - n & W Ry. Co. v. K, 147 F. p. 51; 1-  Cm. Cm. v. B. & O. Ry. Co.,  F. p. 37;  v. Ci T Co., 125 F. p. . e m on vk pruc brout sut by the o G Wm ntt &d not volve  due pfen or jt &fifion tn e ming of the m w. Is Cm. Cm. v. B. & O. Ry. Co., 1 U. 8. 276; E Tn., V. & G. R. Co. v. Is Cm. Cm., 181 U.S. 1; T & P Ry. Co. v. Is Cm. Cm., 162 U.S. 197; Is Cm. Cm. v. A M Ry. Co., 1 U.S. 1;  & Nh Ry. Co. v. , 175 U.S. ; I Cm. Cm. v.  & Nh Ry. Co., 1 U. 8. 3; D., L. & W. . Co. v. K, 147 F. p. 51'; ls Cm. Cm. v.B. & O. Ry. Co.,  F/ p. 37; P v.  C, F. p. 1;I Cm. Cm. v. W & A

�