Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-11-17
THE BEEF TRUST GASES
STATEMENT MADE BY THE AT
ToRNEY GENERAL.

Attorney General Moody has MADE the
following statement In reference to the pleas
of the beef packers in the indictments pend
Ing against them at Chicago:
Ten separate pleas in bar have been filed,
each one of them alleging facts which 1t is
claimed ought to bar the government from
proceeding further in this case.
Eight of these pleas are based upon the
alleged conduct of Mr.. Garfield, commits
sioner OF corporations, in making an inves-
tigation of the affairs Of the defendants in
pursuance Of the authority conferred upon
him by law and In special obedience to the
resolution of the House of Representatives
requiring him to make such inves tigation.
Under the act creating the Department
of Commerce and Labor the commissioner
of corporations has the right to subpoena
and compel the attendance and testimony
OF witnesses and the production of docu-
mentary evidence and to administer oaths,
but with regard to all persons who are sub
poenaed to testify or 10 produce documen-
tary evidence, 1t is provided that immunity
from prosecution shall be given to them II
they obey the commissioners subpoena, ex~
cept that they shall be liable for perjury
for giving false testimony.
THE pleas In bar allege In various forms
ID that Mr.. Garfield did compel the sew
eral defendants to attend under subpoena
and testify and produce documents before
him: % that he waived the oath which he
was authorized to require Of them; 90 that
he promised them, for what they did with
respect to the giving of testimony and pro-
duction of documents, that they should re-
ceiye the immunity provided by law; and
"a that the testimony thus obtained from
the defendants was delivered to the Depart
ment of Justice and to the district attorney.
and by the latter used before the grand
jury to obtain the indictment.
1T is stated by the government that Mr..
Garfield did make the Investigation re-
CURED by the resolution of the House of
Representatives, and that he did receive
from certain of the defendants oral infor-
nation and access to the books of the de-
PENDANT corporations.
TT is, however. contended by the gov
ernment that the information and access
to the books were given voluntarily by the
defendant
Denied by the Government.
THE government denies in point Of fact
that Mr.. Garfield did compel the several
defendants to attend and testify and pro-
duce documents before him. or that he did
subpoena any OF the defendants to appear
before him and testify or produce doeu-
mentary evidence or that he waived the
oath which he was authorized to require of
them; or that he promised them any immu-
nifty whatever in the premises or that any
evidence obtained from the defendants was
delivered to or used by the Department of
Justice or the district attorney before the
THE Attorney General asserts In the
most positive terms that none Of the in
formation obtained by Mr.. Garfield was
used before the grand jury.
The Governments Answer.
after full conference with Mr.. Garfield,
the answer of the government has been pre-
pared by Mr. Pagin, under the supervision
OF the Attorney General and with the as
sistance of the district attorney, and Will
be taken to Chicago and filed in the court
there early next week.
THE seventh plea in bar urges that the
government unlawfully seized certain pa
pers of the defendants and submitted them
TO the grand jury, contrary to the rights
conferred upon. them by the Constitution.
The government denies that 1t obtained any
papers otherwise than by the orderly pro-
cess of subpoena directed to the person
who had the custody of them.
The eighth plea sets up a defense the
fact that the government heretofore pro-
ceeded against the defendants by a petition
under the Sherman act: under which petit
ton an Injunction against the continuance
of the combination was issued about three
years ago and was affirmed last winter by
the unanimous opinion of the Supreme
Court: the Attorney General himself hav-
ing personally argued the case for the gov
eminent in that court; and claims that by
taking this action the government elected
to pursue the civil remedies and is disbarred
from resorting to a prosecution under the
criminal provision of the antitrust law.
The government admits the facts, but
contends that they constitute no bar to
criminal prosecution.
THE answer prepared by the government
will raise a mixed issue of law and fact, TO
be determined not by the Attorney General
or the district attorney but by the court
in which the proceedings are pending"