The Washington herald., 1906-10-20
CONVICTS OIL TRUST
Jury Finds Standard, of Ohio,
Guilty of Violating Law.
WAITING ON SUPREME COURT
No Further Prosecutions to Be Had
Until Highest Court Passes on Case.
Reported Attorney General Ellis
Is Called 10 washingtOn-ROcke-
Teller at His Home in Cleveland.

Findlay. Ohio, Oct 19.-After thirty-twc
hours of elaboration, the jury in the case
of the state of Ohio VS.. The Stand
ard Oil Company, of Ohio. returned a
verdict Of guilty on the charge of con
spiracy against trade IN violation OF
the Valentine antitrust law.
Standard Oil attorneys Immediately
gave notice Of the fling Of a motion for
a new trial. and declare they VIII carry
the case to the highest court in the land.
Prosecutor David was highly gratified
at the result, and said that no further
action against the trust would be taken
until the present case was disposed of in
the higher courts.
attorney General Ellis was pleased
with the verdict, and said that perhaps
now the auxiliary companies Of the Stand
ard would pull down the pirate flag and
4Sht for business in the open.
Further Plans to Fight Trusts.
II was declared tonight that Attorney
General Ellis has been called 10 Wash
ington to confer with Attorney General
Moody with reference to the case. 1t is
said that plans for the further prosecu-
ton of the Standard by the government
viii be discussed.
II the present verdict stands. the Stand
ard or Company will owe the State OF
Ohio the sum of $4,000, if the highest
penalty possible under the Valentine act
is assessed. The statutes provide a pen
atty Of 5000 for violation of the law.
In addition, it provides a penalty of
so a day after an accused company has
been notified to discontinue doing bus
mess as trust Two of the Standard 5
auXiliaries were served notice three
months ago. and the $50 day penalty
can be exacted in their cases.
Grounds for the Appeal.
Attorney Virgil P. Kline. for the Stand
ard, said tonight
a motion for new trial will be filed
within three days. Questions of the juris-
diction of the court, questions of rele-
vancy and competency Of evidence. of
the sumciency Of the charge, and of the
propriety of the courts construction of
the law, will be presented to the review
ing courts as quickly as is consistent
with the preparing of the record. 1t is
unnecessary for me to say that the YER
dict was Il disappointment"
The verdict was rendered at 4.35 O'Clock
the jury having announced its readiness
TO report at O'Clock. The court and at
torneys arrived in half hour. when the
verdict was rendered.
How the Jury stood.
When the case went TO the jury We'd
nesday night the first ballot stood nine
for conviction and three for acquittaI.
As the result Of continuous deliberations
until I o'clock Thursday morning. one Of
the three for acquittal Joined the ma
Jority. At o'clock Thursday night one
of the two remaining for acquittaI went
over to the other side, and at o'clock
this morning the last of the three gave
his consent 10 the verdict of guilty.
A touch of the dramatic marked the
two closing hours Of the jury's delibera-
tion- Hymns We're sung during all but
ten minutes of this time This ten min
utes came at the end. and was occupied
by the remaining juror who had stood
out in explaining his position and sur
render To the majority