Omaha daily bee., 1888-03-18
MORSE eco

act to be lone not to be so done or shall
aid, or abet any such omission or failure,
or shall be guilty of any infraction Of
this act, or shall aid or abet therein,
shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor,
and shall, upon conviction thereof in any
district court of the United States, within
the jurisdiction of which such offense was
committed, be subject to a fine of not to ex-
coed !, 5000 for each offense." This seems
to include all persons in the employ of the
railroad companies named, and all other
companies aud persons who might Join with
them, or aid and abet, in the commission of
any matter or thing prohibited by law.
Neither of the said roads nor their officers,
managers, agents, employees or servants can
lawfully cutter into any agreement, combina-
tion, confederacy, or conspiracy, between
themselves or others, for the purpose of yio-
lating a single provision Of the interstate
commerce law. AS the law requires the
Union Pacific road to take and receive from
the plaintiff freight and cars when offered
for transportation, ana that, too, without dis
elimination, it becomes the duty of the COM
pany, its officers and the employees en-
gagged in operating the road and running
the trains, to so receive and transport the
cars of plaintiff the same that is done for
other roads. If they refuse to do this they
incur the penalty denounced by the tenth sec
ton of the law before referred to. Can they
then enter into any sort of an arrangement
to defeat the operation of the law and thus
prevent the plaintiff from having its cars re-
ceived and transported by the Union Pacific
road without being guilty of a conspiracy to
defeat and nullify the operation of the law!
If a conspiracy is formed to prevent the
Union + ific from receiving the plaintiffs
cars, is chat not most clearly an otfense
against the United States! The ''offense''
against the United States consists in refus-
ing to take the cars and interchange traffic
with other roads subject to the provisions of
the law. AS it is an offense against the
United States to do this, it is also an offense
against the same for two or more persons to
enter into a conspiracy to 40 the same thing.
Now, the interstate commerce law fully JUS
titles the issuing of injunctions, mandatory
or otherwise for the purpose of enforcing
the provisions of the law. The power and
authority for such procedure is beyond dis
pute; and for such purposes the circuit court
shall be deemed always open.
Now, If two or more parties enter into a
combination and conspiracy to violate the
interstate law, and at least one of
them commit an overt act in furtherance of
the common design, all the parties joining in
the conspiracy would be liable TO suffer.
What think you the penalty would be? 1t
is supposed that the conspirators would incur
the same penalty and receive the same pun
ishment as those who would violate the 10th
section of the interstate lava BY
no means. The law under which a cOnspira-
tor would be tried is highly penal and more
stringent in its provisions than the other one.
= hN AafN SO NV - ~ I'N''h N'NN - D''NA''
well be misunderstood. 1t is as follows: "lt
two or more persons conspire either to com
NIT any otfense against the United States, oil
to defraud tssS United States in any manner
or for any purpose, and one or more of such
parties do any act to effect the object of the
conspiracy, all the parties to such conspiracy
shall be liable TO a penalty of not more thar
10000 or to Imprisonment for not more thar
two years, or both fine and Imprisonment il
the discretion of the COURT
Certainly such acts as would naturally an(
necessarily tend to prevent a due Interchange
of business between the two roads would
make the offense complete and parties would
be liable accordingly. The penalty for en
terlng into a conspiracy 10 violate the law
and by so doing, committing an offensI
against the United States, is more severe
than the penalty imposed for a direct viola
ton of the said interstate commerce law
] presume no one supposes that these defend
ants any other person can be compelled TO re
main in the service of the Union Pacific rail
road company any longer than it suits theil
convenience TO do SO.
hold, then, that it Is the duty Of tie UnioI
Pacific railroad company TO afford the plain
tiff all reasonable Facilities for the inter
change Of their legitimate business; anC
that the road, its officers officers, managers
agents, employees and servants who are i'm
mediately engaged in the transportation busi
ness, in the way of making up and running
of trains, etc, are bound to receive plaintiffs
cars and freight, when rendered for the pur
pose Of being transported over the defend
ants line of road, subject, however, to al
reasonable rules and regulations, and tina
too, without discrimination against tn