¶1A judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals which turns on a matter of fact of no general importance, depending on an appreciation of circumstances admitting of different interpretations, will not. be revised by certiorari. P. 544,
¶29 F. (2d) 570, affirmed.
¶3Certiorari (270 U. S. 638) to a judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals which set aside an order of the Federal Trade Commission.
¶4Mr. Adrien F. Busick, with whom Solicitor General Mitchell, and Messrs. Bayard T. Hainer and Edward L. Smith were on the brief, for petitioner.
¶5Mr. Edward S. Rogers, with whom Mr. Jonathan H. Holmes was on the brief, for respondent.
¶7delivered the opinion of the Court.
¶8The statement of the petition for certiorari that the judgment and opinion below might seriously hinder future administration of' the law was grave and sufficiently probable to justify issuance of the writ.
¶9Proper decision óf the controversy depends upon a question of fact. Did the American Tobacco- Company becomé party to the unlawful combination of.tobacco jobbers at Philadelphia to maintain prices? After considering much' evidence the Commission gave affirmative answer to that query; but the Circuit Court of Appeals thought there was nothing to support their view. 9 Fed. (2d) 570.
¶10It now appears to us that this matter of fact is of no general importance. Accordingly, we adhere to the usual rule of non-interference where conclusions of Circuit Courts of Appeals depend on appreciation of circumstances which admit of different interpretations. And upon that ground alone we affirm the judgment below.
¶11The opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals is of uncertain intendment and is not satisfactory as an exposition of the law. What this Court has said in many opinions indicates cléarly enough the general purpose of the statute and the necessity of applying it with strict regard thereto-
¶12Affirmed.