The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1906-12-07
ROOSEVELT'S ANNUAL
MESSAGE TO CONGRESS
President Deals with Some New and Important
Subjects and He Also Recommends
Much Legislation

that basis-that is. II this discrimination
in favor of this particular shipper was
made with an l8 instead of % cent
rate and the tariff rate was maintained
as against their competitors-the re-
suit sa I'm might IT. be and not improbably would
out OF business. This crime is one which
In it's nature is deliberate and premedi-
between the date of Palmer's letter re-
questing the reduced rate and the answer
of the railroad company deciding to
wards this business was carried on and
these claims for rebates submitted month
AFTER AFTER month mo and checks in payment Of
a violation Of the law, in my opinion. in
its essential nature, is very much
more heinous act than the ordinary
fore criminal courts constantly for pun
ishment and which arise from sudden
passion Pas or temptation This crime in
education and Of large business expert
ence. whose business standing in the
community was such that they might
ttenance Of which alone in this country
the security Of their property depends
railroad corporation. which. like other
railroad corporations. has received gra-
tqi,tously from the state large and valu
ience and its own, which performs quasi
public functions and which is charged
with the highest obligation in the trans
action OF Its business to treat the citizens
of this country alike, and not to carry on
its business with unjust determinations
Of et1ens etFfns ss Crime Gf If Il.
nature is one usually done with secrecy.
and proof Of which it is very difficult
was passed in 1887 nearly 70 Years ago. go.
Ever since that time complaints OF the
granting of rebates by railroads has been
the congress has repeatedly past iegis.
evil. the difficulties of obtaining PROOF
cases is so great that this is the first
case that has ever been brought in this
court. and, as informed: this case
are the only cases that have ever been
brought In the eastern, part of this coun-
try. In fact, but few cases of this kind
east or west. Now, under these circum-
stances. l am forced to the conclusion.
in case In which the proof is SO clear
duty Of the court to fix a penalty which
shall in some. degree. be Commensurate
with the gravity Of the offense AS be-
the principal penalty should be imposed
on the corporation. The traffic manager
In this Ct case; presumably, acted without
any interest in the transaction. either
by the direct authority or in accordance
with what he understood to be the policy
or the wishes of his employer.
1.-The sentence of this court in this case
is. that the defendant Pomeroy. for each
been convicted. be fined the sum Of $1,000.
making six fines, amounting in all to the
sum Of $1,000; and the defendant. The
aorK huds9h o Ryer M Rail
Of which 1t has been convicted, be fined
the sum Of $4,000. making six fines
Of and an hG o to nat the
will be entered In this case"
Evasion by Technicallties.
In connection with this matter. would
like to call attention to the very unsat-
sulting in large part from the habit Of
setting aside the judgments of inferior
courts on technicalities absolutely un-
and where there is no attempt to show
that there has been any failure Of SUBJ
stantial justice. 1t would be we'll 10 en-
act a law providing something to the
No judgment shall be set aside or new
trial granted tn any cause. civil or crim-
jury or the improper admission or re-
lection Of evidence. or for error as to any
matter Of pleading e or procedure unless.
application is made. after an examina-
ton of the entire cause, it shall affirma-
lively appear that the error complained
justice.
In my last message I suggested the en-
actment of law in connection with tho
issuance OF tnjuncttons, attention hav-
ing been sharply, drawn to- the matter
by the demand that the right Of apply
ing injunctions in labor cases should be
whether law abolishing altogether the
use Of injunctions in such cases would
stand the test Of the courts; in which
ineffective. Moreover, believe it would
be wrong altogether to prohibit the use
Of in5qnctions e,.i It is criminal to permit
hands in unfolding the law; and If men
seek to destroy life or property by mob
violence there should be no impairment
them in the most summary and effective
way possible. But SO far as possible the
abuse OF the power should be provided
In this matter Of injunctions there is
lodged in the hands Of the judiciary
subject to the possibility of grave abuse
! It is power that should be exercised
@ eea to the ser sS0ua of al ssn
| and condemnation should be meted out
as much to the judge who fails to use
boldly or %
At At for his office will enjoin any resort
TO violence OF lNtlHlludtlOIl, especially Oy
| conspiracy, no matter what his opinion
may be Of the rights Of the original quar-
rel There must be no hesitation in
likewise be no such abuse of the in
junctive power as is implied in forbidding
| laboring men to strive for their own bet
nor must the injunction be used merely
to aid some big corporation In carrying
out schemes for its own ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
mary injunction in labor case, IL
granted without adequate proof (even
when authority can be found to support
founded). may often settle the dispute
| between the parties; and therefore if
improperly granted may do irreparable