Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1906-02-16
A SHAMEFUL FACT.
The Beef Packers Promised Immunity by Com
missioner Garfield.

The Beef Packers Promised Immunity by Com.
missioner Garfield.
People may now understand the
cause why Garfield made report las,
year of his investigation OF the multi.
millionaire packing companies that
made intelligent people almost hold
their breaths for it's audacity. 1t was
that the packers were not making an
unreasonable profit on their business
nor conducting it in an illegal or un-
fair manner. 1t now comes out that
Garfield had declared to the packers
that he was not gathering information
to be used outside of the office OF the
Commissioner of Corporations, and Ed.
ward f. Swift, President of the Swift
company, testified to this, as we'll as
the statement that he (Garfeld) spoke
for the President and that it was the
policy OF the Administration to pro-
tect the packers.
In the beef cases lately tried in Chi.
cago, before Federal Judge Humphrey,
the packers attorneys laid great stress
upon this agreement with the Com.
missioner (who was supposed to be en-
gagged in representing the wishes of
the people to get at all the facts) as
making it improper to use any of the
testimony given from the packers for
their conviction.
Several witnesses testified that be-
fore submitting his report to the pub
lie Commissioner Garfield presented
proof sheets of the same to the packers
and their representatives. So clearly
has this been established as fact that
even United States District Attorney
Morrison is using that fact in the hope
of saving his case. Addressing the
court Mr.. Morrison said:
"The theory of the government is that
there was an understanding that the
matter (Garfield's report should not be
published unless the packers were salts.
fed with the report. We will show that
MIR. Garfield came back with a type
written copy of his report which had not
yet been printed and that the packers
were ready and anxious to have this
report 60 to the publisher.
OF course it was humiliating for
representative of the government
to be required to employ this shameful
fact in order TO establish technicality
through which the packers expect a
dismissal of the proceedings.
Whatever the secrets revealed by
the packers to Commissioner Garfield
were, his conclusions amounted to the
claim that the packers were making o
very small amount OF money and in
some instances had actually lost
money, and that there was, in fact, no
such thing as beef trust. The Amer
can people did not know then that be.
fore that report had been submitted to
the public it had passed under the
critical eye Of the very men with
whose investigation the Commissioner
of Corporations was charged. 1t was
generally believed at the time that
Mr.. Garfield had not made . serious
investigation Of the beef trust. But
until the revelations before the Federal
Court at Chicago it was not known
that the recently created Department
of Commerce and Labor was, in the
language of the street, -" playing horse"
with the helpless victims of greedy
monopolists. Yet this same man who
agreed that before his report was sub
mitted it would be acceptable to the
men under investigation, was assigned
to Investigate the Standard Oil trustl
It will occur to great many people
that whatever the outcome of the beef
trust case in Chicago may be, Mr..
Roosevelt should dismiss Commission.
er Garfield from the government ser
wise.
Or else admit that the Administrs.
ton is guided by the defiant slogan ol
the great Boss OF the Republican party,
Marcus Hanna, in such emergencies,
"What are you going to do about it."