Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1905-12-05

of Illinois. which resulted In ,hc return
OF an iudictmen; on July l. 1905. against
Armour g. Co. and J. Ogden Armour, presi-
dent Patrick a. Valentine. treasurer; Ar
thur Meeker. general manager; Thomas j.
Connors, superintendent, and Samuel A.
McRobeTts, assistant treasurer, OF the said
Armour 4 Co. the Armour Packing COM
pany and Charles w. Armour. president;
Sw95 AND S99msSGpy and Louis wee s SEnt
dent; Charles IA. Swift. Director: Law
renee a. Carton treasurer; d. Edwin Hart
well. secretary, and Albert H. Veeder,
Robert c, McManus and Arthur f. Evans,
agents of the said Swift and Company,
the Fairbank Canning company and Ed
ward Morris, vice president. and Ira n
Morris. secretary of the said Fairbanf
Canning company; and the Cudahy Pack
irg company, and Edward A. Cudahy,
vice president and general manager of the
said the Cudahy Packing company,
Against this indictment many preliminary
objections have been urged and all have
been disposed Of in favor Of the govern
ment except ten special pleas in bar re-
Gently filed and now pending before the
district court at Chicago
Numerous alleged violations of the Sher-
man act have undergone careful examina-
tion in the department In some cases
after full examination, the department has
declined to take action. and in other cases
the investigation is still in progress. sew
cral cases are in such state OF compile
ton that action In the near future Is likely
to be taken.
The consideration of this class of cases
has taxed the resources of the department
have existed for long time. They conduct
their business secretly and with the aid OF
skilled legal advice, and their operations
cover many of the states and In some in
stances all the states Each proceeding
undertaken has been preceded by labor the
amount and character of which cannot ade-
quately be described.
The safety Appliance Law.
On December 10. 1901. the supreme court
of the United States handed down it's de-
cision and opinion in the case OF w. o.
johnson VS. the Southern Pacific company
Although the government was not party
TO this case, by leave of the court ii was
heard by brief and oral argument. This
opinion definitely settled almost every
point which had previously been raised
with regard to the Interpretation of the
safety appliance acts, clearly sustaining the
law and placing II upon firm foundation.
Following this decision, on December 30,
1904, the attorney general issued letter Of
instructions TO all United states attorneys,
In which he said at does not appear that
any question can now arise as to the proper
Interpretation of the law. since this decision
apparently settles every disputed point"
Attorneys were informed that ".he govern
ment is determined upon a strict enforce
ment of these statutes.' and instructed to
pay particular attention to oil cases Of vio-
lation brought to their attention by the In In
terstate Commerce commission or It's in
spectors, or by other persons
United states Prisoners.
Detailed statistics gathered with regard
to United states prisoners show them to
have been confined, In addition to the
United States pententlaries, located one
each at Atlanta, Ga, Fort LeaVenworth,
Kan, and Mcneil island. Wash, in sixty
eight state institutions scattered through
out the United States.
On july /, 1903. there were 32O7 United
States prisoners in the various prisons and
reformatories of the country.
On July /. 1904, there were 1903 OF such
At the close of the fiscal year ending
June 80, 1906, there were S.445.