Buck

I am of opinion that the restrictions here sought to be enforced are invalid, both at common law and under Act Cong. July 2, 1890, c. 647, 26 Stat. 209 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3200). The case made by the hill falls within Dr. Miles Medical *384 Co. v. Park & Sons Co., 220 U. S. 373, 408 , 31 Sup. Ct. 376, 385 ( 55 L. Ed. 502 ), wherein the court declares broadly, underscoring mine:

The recent case of Bauer & Cie v. O’Donnell, 229 U. S. 1 , 33 Sup. Ct. 616, 57 L. Ed. 1041 , decided May 26, 1913, which is the latest one called to my attention, construes the former case thus:

Since both of these decisions are by the Supreme Court of the United States, and, of course, authoritative here, it is unnecessary to review the large number of other cases, both state and federal, bearing upon the question.

Said motion will be allowed,