The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-10-24

illegal conspiracy today again dtldcheu
the famous so-called beef trust pro-
cess. A special plea in bar and an
additional special plea in bar We're
flied by counsel for the packers. The
nature OF the special plea was a sur
prise to the government officials, al
though they were aware OF what would
be pleaded in the additional plea, the
issuance Of an injunction by Judge
Grosseuo.
lncrimlnated Themselves.
The special plea sets up assertions
concerning Investigations by the COM
missioner of corporations and alleges
that the defendants were compelled TO
testify and to produce certain books
and other data. and that thereafter the
matter was submitted TO the president
of the United States, and finally 10 the
United States District Attorney, and
that the district attorney used the ma
terisl in seeking indictments against
the attendants. Because of these al
legged facts the defendants ask that
the indictment be dismissed.
Grosscup Injunction.
Regarding the Grosscup injunction
the plea fled today maintains that by
the prosecution of the injunction and
the entry of a final decree for the SUI
of America" did finally and fully elect
To pursue that remedy and not TO
prosecute these defendants respectively
for or on account of the said supposed
engaging IN the supposed cOnspiracies
which is in said indictment mentioned.
or any or either of them, and that "Of
this they respectively put themselves
upon the country"
Resolution of Congress.
The special plea in bar declares that
the Fifty-eighth congress of the United
States passed a resolution directing the
secretary of commerce and labor TO
investigate the cause of the low prices
in beef cattle and the alleged unusually
large margin between cattle prices and
the cost OF dressed meat 10 the con-
sumner. The secretary directed the com
missioner of corporations 10 make d dill
igent investigation, which, il is alleged
in the plea. he did. His investigation
included, among other things, the
transactions, matters and things aver
red in the Indictment. This iuvestiga-
ton was pushed in the following cities,
among others:
Chicago, South Omaha. Kansas City,
Mo. Kansas City. Kan: Sioux City
Fort Worth. St Joseph. Los Angeles
and East ST. Louis. Then. it is al
legged:
Compelled TO Testify.
ION March :. 1905, and on divers days
thereafterWards and before the finding
of the Indictment, the defendants q
s the aforesaid mentioned places and al
/dtvers other cities, at the instance. di-
y EaetiOn, requirement and CompulsiOn @.
the commissioner Of corporations. did
attend before him and testify with re-
spect TO the divers transactions. mat
ters and things directed TO be investi-
gated.
These defendants further say that
on March 5, 1905 and divers days there
afterwards, the commissioner reported
the information so gathered TO the pres
ident of the United States and en-
bodied in report containing 35l pages,
entitled Report of the Commissioner
of Corporations on the Beef Industry"
This report is filed as Exhibit A, "
and IS made part Of the pleas.
Report Used to Prosecute.
Then it is alleged that on March 20
1905, the report was furnished United
States District Attorney Bethea in Chi
CagO, and that the facts contained, as
secured by the commissioner of corpO-
rations, were used by the district at
toTney and by the grand jury I'm con-
Quoting the investigation resulting i'm
the return Of the Indictment by the spe-
cial grand jury, and were also used
In preparing and searching out other
evidence used against the defendants.
and are now being used 10 search out
evidence 10 be used I'm the trial of the
beef cases The special plea concludes
with the following statement:
Claim Of immunity.
And this defendant AYERS ana sub
lnits that under and by the laws Of
the United States in this belief, be-
cause OF the premises aforesaid. this
defendant cannot be prosecuted or sub
Jected 10 any penalty or forfeiture for
or on account Of the respective trans
actions. matters or things. or any OF
either of them, which are in said in
dictment or any count thereof in that
behalf mentioned and charged against
this defendant i'm manner and form as
same are in said indictment and in the
respective counts thereof charged
against the defendant.
Wherefore. he prays judgment and
that by the court he may be dismissed
and discharged from said premises IL
said indictment and express count
- Aof specified"
Another Special Plea.
Samuel McRobert, agent OF Armour
& Co, filed a separate special plea in
which he seeks immunity because he
testified before the grand jury which
afterwards returned an indictment
against him. Under a federal statute
IL is alleged no person shall be prose
cuted IN the case in which he testified
II he is compelled to testify against
himself. This plea is held TO be good
by many and although il will be vigor-
ously attacked by the government il is
declared there is a likelihood of the
quashing of the Indictment in the case
OF McROberts. The other pleas are not
held 10 be of great Importance by the
government. District Attorney Nor
riSon has not yet decided what action
20 take IN regard 10 them.