Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1905-12-21
Attorney Generals Position Regard
Ing Santa Re Cases. n
PLEASING TO president.
Refusal Of OmeiaIs TO Prosecute
Paul Morton and others Was be-
y cause Of ImpossibiIity
Of Convietion.

| INV 6VNOA AAAtCAs tASN+AA1t tAAC AAt~0AAtSAA
Topeka Santa Fe railway company was
made public Sunday by authority Of
President Roosevelt. It was in the
form Of two letters, under date Of the
18th and 18th instant, respectively
the one being written by Attorney
General Moody and the other by the
president The letters quote court de-
cisions and contain considerable infor-
nation concerning the action of the
president and the attorney general in
the Santa Fe case, particularly with
reference to the work Of the special
counsel, Messrs. Harmon, Of Cincin-
natl, and Judson, Of st. Louis, who
were employed by the government to
inquire into the facts OF the case and
who subsequently withdrew from It
because their recommendations as to
the prosecution Of the Santa Re on
cials were not adopted.
The history Of the Santa Fe case Is
reviewed in the letter by Mr.. Moody
and the attorney generals position is
approved by the president in the sec
ond letter:
The attorney general recites the in.
vestigation and report Of the inter
state commerce commission, which re.
port suggested the roads practice was
in violation Of restraining order is
sued against the railway company in
March, 1902, upon bill in equity
brought by the United States. The at
torney general reported to the presi-
dent that proceedings under the re-
straining order could not be main
tanned.
Under ordinary conditions" the let
ter continues, "the advice which gave
you probably would have been re-
garded by you as conclusive against
the undertaking Of any action based
upon the restraining order. But the
circumstances were extraordinary and
very great public interest in the case ex-
listed, aroused by the fact that Mr..
Morton, a member Of your cabinet,
had been vice president Of the railway
company charged with the manage
ment Of the traffic during part Of
the time in which the practices com
planned Of continued. l, therefore, sug-
gested the employment Of special coun-
sci Of eninence, and you directed their
employment" "a
II have stated that Judge Philips is
sued the restraining order drawn into
the question by these informations for
contempt. The order was issued by
him after full argument by counsel for
United States and for the railway com
pany. Undoubtedly, his decision in the
contempt case was inconsistent with
his decision upon the original bill in
equity praying the injunction, a demur-
rer to which he oyerruled subsequent
" issuing the restraining order. But
eince his first decision the supreme
court had decided the cases of the
Missouri Pacific Railway company YER
slis the United States and Swift versus
hefUnited States and Judge Philips re-
garded these two decisions as fatal TO
the vaidity Of the restraining order.
| hardly need say that in my opinion
the decision Of Judge Philips is a cor
rect expression of the law, because as
you know, 1t Is 10 conformity with the
advice given to you at the very thresh-
hold Of these proceedings, and at all
times, from then until now, believed
by me to be sound. In any events the
decision lie final because the govern
ment has no appeal upon a question OF
this kind"
The presidents letter to the attor-
ney general in part follows;
"Sir: l have received your letter
of December 18th The facts therein
set forth prove in conclusive fashion
that you were absolutely right In the
position you have all along taken both
as regards the proceedings proposed
against the officers of the company, in
Guiding Mr. Paul Morton, recently a
member Of my cabinet. In my letter
Of June 18th last in reply to yours OF
June kth. in which you advised the
course which has actually been take1
and which has been SO slgnally iustf-
fed BY the event, wrote you that in
my Judgment. as in your own, that you
would have been wholly without jnsti-
fication in proceeding individually |