The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1905-06-23


Equitable Assurance Society of New
York and former vice president of the
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway
Co., is not to be prosecuted by the de-
partment of justice for the alleged CIV
ing of rebates to the Colorado Fuel &
Iron Co.
President Roosevelt has fully in
dorsed the action Of Attorney General
Moody in resisting the repeated appeals
of Judson Harmon or Cincinnati and
Frederick N. Judson of st. Louis, spe-
cial counsel in the case, that they be
permitted to proceed against the Off
GERS of the Santa Fe road.
He has directed that in both the Col
orado Fuel case and in the Interna-
tional Harvester case, proceedings for
contempt against the companies be
taken by the government
You will not, however" he states,
take action against any official Of the
ktchison, Topeka & Santa Fe which
you do not take against the officials of
any other railway under precisely SIM
liar circumstances"
The President also declares: zone
Of these officers (of the Santa Fe), Mr..
Morton, is a member Of my cabinet.
This fact is not to be allowed to shield
him, nor on the other hand is it to be
allowed to cause him to be singled out,
or the officers with whom he is associ-
ated to be singled out for attack"
AS a result of this decision, Messrs.
Harmon and Judson have been per-
ton with the case, the attorney gen.
eral expressing regret that they could
not see their way clear to continue
their investigations until the record in
the case was completed.
There was made public tonight the
Presidents Endorsement Of the depart
nent's action, Secretary Mortons letter
to the President explaining his connec-
tion with rebates, and the Presidents
reply, in which he pays high tribute to
his secretary, and congratulates the
Equitable Assurance Society upon Sc
curing his services. The correspond
ence between the department OF justice
and Messrs Harmon and Judson, show
ing the precise points of difference
which have arisen, concludes a memoir
able document.
Under date of June the attorney
general, in reciting to the President
the progress made in the investigation
Of the alleged giving of rebates by the
Santa Fe railway, reports his decision
aS follows:
81 do not believe that proceedings
ought to be begun against officers Of
corporation until some evidence is
forthcoming that they did either by
act or connivance, have some relation
TO the guilty conduct. Mr. Ripley was
the president Of the railway company
during all the time the transactions re-
ferred to occurred, and Mr.. Morton, a
member of your cabinet, during a part
of the time was one of its vice presi-
dents, and among his duties was the
management of the freight traffic of the
system. do not find a scintilla Of ev-
ideDce taken before the interstate COM
merce commission which tends to show
that either Of these officials had the
slightest connection with the miscon-
duct complained Of, or any knowledge
whatever Of its existence"
TO this the President made the fol-
lowing response:
81 have received and carefully con-
sidered your letter. entirely agree
with your conclusions. In my opinion |
you would be wholly without justifica-
ton in proceeding individually against |
the officers Of the Atchison, Topeka & |
Santa Fe railway for contempt when |
neither the interstate commerce COM
mission nor the special counsel you
have employed have developed a single |
fact of any kind beyond the holding of
their Offices tending to implicate any
one Of these officers. One of the Off
GERS, Mr.. Morton, is a member of my
cabinet. This fact is not to be allowed
to shield him, nor on the other hand Is
II to be allowed to cause him to be
singled out, or the officers with whom
he is associated to be singled out, for
attack.
"At about the same time that the in
junction was obtained against the
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe, an in
junction was obtained against several
other western railroads. Subsequently
IL was developed by the Interstate COM
merce commission that under the guise
of revision Of rates. unlawful rebates
were given by these railroads to the
International Harvester Co., just as a
rebate was given by the Atchison road
to the Colorado Fuel Co. Upon atten-
tion being called to the case by the
interstate commerce commission, the
unlawful practice was abandoned in
the Harvester case, and 1t was aban-
doned in the case Of the Colorado Fuel
Co. The two cases stand precisely on
a par. No one has suggested, and, as