The Ely miner. [volume] (Ely, Minn.) 1895-1986, 1906-07-13
Find ROAD GUILTY
OF GIVING REBATES
JURY IN FEDERAL COURT AT CHI
CAGo DECIDES AGAINST
ALTON COMPANY.
Two Former Officials Also Included in
Verdict, Judge Lands Having
Overruled Motion to Dismiss on
All But Two Counts.

Overruled Mot1on TO DISMISS on
All But Two Counts.
Chicago, July THE Chicago &
Alton Railroad company and two
former officials of the road were found
guilty Friday of granting rebates.
The verdict was returned before Judge
. Lands in the federal court after jury
had practically been instructed by the
court that there was little reason to
doubt the guilt of the railroad corpor
alton.
Punishment for the offenses charged
is fine of not less than $4,000 nor
more than $4,000, according to the
district attorney.
The road is declared guilty on each
of eight counts. Secret concessions
granted by the company to Schwarzs-
child & Sulzberger formed the basis of
the indictments.
This is considered one of the most
important victories of it's kind won
by the government. 1t means the be-
ginning of many prosecutions.
The attorneys of the railroad gave
notice of an appeal. They may, how
ever, in view of the evidence, decide
to waive further effort to prove the in
nocence of the road of conspiracy.
Judge K. M. Lands overruled mo-
ton made in behalf of John M.
Faithorn and Frederick A. Wann,
former executives of the Chicago &
Alton railway, charged with giving
rebates to Schwarzschild & Sulzberger
that the cases be taken from the jury
and a court order entered in favor of
the defendants.
Not Guilty on Two Counts.
The motion was overruled as applied
to eight of the ten counts in the indict-
ment charging rebates.
The basis of the motion made by
the attorneys for the railroad men
was that the refunds, assuming that
they had been made, did not consti-
tute rebates as contemplated by the
law.
The judge says that it appears from
the evidence that prior to 1901 the
Chicago & Alton Railway company
charged the belt road four dollars a
car for hauls from the packing COM
pany's platforms, over the packers
private tracks and the belt line tracks
to the Chicago & Alton tracks, and
that the belt line paid another dollar to
the packing company for the part of
the haul that was over the tracks of
the company.
Payment Made Direct.
This practice is said to have been
known to the Alton company and con-
tinued until January 1, 1901, when,
for some reason which does not ap-
pear, but at the alleged request of
Schwarzschild & Sulzberger, the ar
rangements were changed so that the
Alton company made the payments
direct to the packing company, in
stead of through the medium of the
belt company.
belt line filed new schedules show
ing it's rates for moving the packing
company's traffic to be three dollars
a car, which amount the Alton alb
sorbed in it's tariff collected from
Schwarzschild & Sulzberger and paid
over to the belt road
Court Outlines Case.
After quoting the interstate COM
merce law, which requires published
schedules of rates, and the Elkins
law, forbidding rebates or cutting of
tariffs, the courts avs:
ut is argued in behalf of the de-
PENDANTS that if any section of the
which requires the carriers schedule
to state the terminal charges and
rules which change the aggregate
rates. l am unable to see the force
of this contention. Plainly, the re-
turn by the defendant carrier to the
packing company of part of
the money paid by that shipper to the
carrier for the transportation of the
shippers product is not charge or
rule or regulation within the meaning
of the law.
Definition of Crate"
"The question is whether or not the
payment so made is a device whereby
TIC pdChluS COulpduy . pIOpcTIy Is
transported at less than the Atoms
published rate, which, as seen above,
includes the service on the belt COM
pany's tracks. 1t would seem that to
state this question is to answer it. BY
the word rate is not meant merely a
figure or figures printed on a schedule
filed with the interstate commerce COM
mission and exhibited on the walls of
a railway station. The real rate is
the net cost to the shipper of the trans
portation of his property. This net
amount in the case before me is one
dollar car less than the carriers pub
lished schedule represents the rate to
be. Viewing the transaction from the
standpoint most favorable to defend
ants, it amounts simply to the rail-
way company assuming the cost of get
ting the shippers property to the car
rier's rails for transportation, a sub
stantial consideration not mentioned in
or contemplated by the published
schedules