The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-12-13
Three Elevator Companies
Follolu Lead of the
Railroads.
Indictments Brought in Min.
neapolis Declared Void
Lacking Legal Basis. :"

Arguments on the demurrers inter-
posed by the railways and grain firms
charged with giving and receiving re-
bates in the Indictments returned by
the recent special federal grand jury
were begun today before Judge Will
liam Lochren and Page Morris of the
United States circuit court, in the Min
neapolis federal building. Counsel for
the Omaha and Great Northern rail
.Ca1lI- Dinsmore Elevator companies
and the Duluth Milling company were
heard. Their main contention was
that the Hepburn bill had repealed the
provisions Of the Elkins act under
which the indictments had been found
and that it's peculiar phraseology was
a complete bar to the present action,
even tho the offenses had been commit
ted. as alleged. - .. ! .
: The United States is represented by
District Attorney Charles G: Houpt
Paul Ewart. ~.
+ =: ATTACKED Indictments. D.,
counsel for the ' Omaha, i Began the ees at t.
tack on the indictments. He called
attention to the fact that the United
States statutes recognized the legality
Of terminal charges by providing that
they be included in the published rates
underhanded about them. He pointed
out that sicing, terminal and stor-
age' charges were specifically men,
toned. -:
"The 500 has its own elevators at
Gladstone, on Green Bay,' said Judge
Wilson. eff we wish to build up our
line to the great lakes so that it can
compete with the 500, we must give our
patrons the same advantage. What law
says that we may not say to them that
We we have no elevator, but we will put
If we, did not, it would give all the
traffic to the 500 and kill competition,
the very thing the law seeks to foster.
- believe in and commend all legis-
la ton to make the railways obey the
law and prevent discrimination. It is
wise: If the government would only
rse it's power to punish the guilty, It
would be well. I hope this court will
So rule in this case as to put an end
| to- these prosecutions, which tend to
bring this law into disrepute. 5 4.
i. Law Not in Effect.
, s., The /: law under which this in
.dictment has been returned is not in
effect since the passage Of the Hepburn
law. This is common statutory con-
struction. In its repeating clause the
Hepburn act states expressly that it
shall not affect scauses now pending.
| that a new law does not cancel Of
lenses against the old law. / am con-
WINGED by. the dissimilarity of the Ian
guage Of this clause and similar
clause in the Elkins law, that it was
| the deliberate intention of congress to
| cancel all such previous offenses except
those already before the courts.' :
| w. r. Begg, for the Great, Northern
railway, followed closely the argument
OF Judge Wilson,. He pointed out that
the indictments must lie under the Ell.
kins. law and District Attorney Haupt
admitted this. ~ = -
dslissimiIlLarity between The two acts
| The Elkins law, he said, made all re.
bates, whether Intentional or not
crimes. The Hepburn low, by the use
OF the word "knowingly,' introduced
the question Of intent.
| For the Elevators.
! G. A. Severance of Davis, Kellogg &
Severance appeared for the three ele-
some objection to his speaking at that
time, but upon Mr.. Severance explain
ing that he wished only to add to the
argument on the repeal Of the; Elkin
law, he withdrew his objection.
Mr.. Severance further elaborated the
preceding arguments and then said:
cup to 1906 every person accepting
OF. giving a rebate was guilty of a
crime regardless Of the question Of
criminal intent. This was manifestly
unfair as only. an expert rate. clerk
could know if a rebate were given and
| there were thousands of innocent per
sons who H technically aaje violated the law
| in the Hepburn bill to wipe the slate
| clean and start afresh on more equit-
able basis. y =. E g. e-s..,a $780, A..
The federal counsel did not reply un.
til after all the counsel for the defend
ants had been heard. " =