Waterbury evening Democrat., 1906-04-18

clal message, delivered to the con- gress to-day, President Roosevelt de- clares that the result Of the recent
 trial of the beef packers" in Chi | cago was miscarriage of justice"
 and that the interpretation placed by Judge Humphrey on the will of
 congress lis such as to make that will absolutely abortive."
 The message, which is most sen sational in character, is based large-
 ly on letter to the president from
 Attorney General Moody in which the attorney general reviews the
 proceedings of the case of the gov ernment against the beef packers. The president says it is clear that no criticism attaches to Commissioner
 Garfield, as what he did was in pur-
 suance of duty imposed on him by
 congress. He refers sharply, how
 ever, to the decision of Judge
 Humphrey, saying that congress
 could not have foreseen such de-
 cision and that he can hardly believe
 that the ruling of Judge Humphrey will be followed by other judges. He
 declares that such interpretation of the law as that placed on 1t by
 Judge Humphrey "comes measurably
 near making the law farce," and
 he recommends that congress pass q
 declaratory act stating its real in- tention. The president also requests congress to confer upon the govern
 ment, by statute, the same right of appeal in criminal cases which the defendant now enjoys. where the
 merits of the case nave not been de-
 termined The rull text of, the mes sage follows:
 ITO the Senate and House of Repre-
 sentatives.
 1T submit herewith a letter of the attorney general, enclosing a state ment of the proceedings by the Unit ed States against the individuals and corporations commonly known as the
 beef packers and commenting upon the decision of District Judge Humphrey. The result has been . miscarriage of justice. It clearly ap pears from the letter of the attorney general that no criticism whatever attaches to Commissioner Garfield; what he did was in strict accordance with. the law and in pursuance of duty imposed on him by congress which could not be avoided; and of course congress in passing the Mar tin resolution could not possibly have foreseen the decision of Judge Humphrey.
 But this interpretation by Judge Humphrey of the will of the con gress, as expressed in legislation, is such as to make that will absolutely abortive. Unfortunately there is a grave doubt whether the government has the right of appeal from this de- cision of the district judge. The case well illustrates the desirability of conferring upon the government the same right of appeal in criminal cases. on questions of law, which the defendant now has. in all cases where the defendant had not been put in jeopardy by a trial upon the merits of the charge made against him.
 ''fhe laws of many of the states. and the law of the District of Co., lumbia, recently enacted by the con- gress. give the government the right of appeal. A general law of the character indicated should certainly be enacted.
 Furthermore 1t is very desirable tO enact a law declaring the true construction of the existing legisla- tion SO far as 1t affects immunity. can hardly believe that the ruling of Judge Humphrey will be followed by other judges. but if it should be fol- lowed. the result would be either completely to nullify very much and possibly the major part of the good to be obtained from the interstate commerce law and from the law ere ating the bureau of corporations in the department of commerce and la bor; or else frequently to obstruet an appeal to the criminal laws by the department of justice. There seems to be no good reason why the department of justice. Iae depart ment of commerce and labor. and the interstate commission. each should not. for the common good. proceed within its own powers without undue interference with the functions of the other.
 Tt is of course necessary. under the constitution and the laws. that persons who give testimony or pro duce evidence as witnesses. should receive immunity from prosecution. It had hitherto been supposed that tde immunity conferred by existing laws was only upon persons. who. being subpoenaed. had given testi- mony or produced evidence as wit nesses. relating to any offerse with which they were. or might be. charged. But Judge Humphreys de- cisIon Is. in elect. that -- either the of corporations does his duty. or the interstate commerce commission does its. by making the by which taey are re- quIred though they issue no sub poens and receive no testimony or evidence. within the proper meaning of these words. the very fact Of the may. Of itself. operate k