The free lance. (Fredericksburg, Va.) 1885-1926, 1906-03-22
g and the Tidewater and Piedmont Country.
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES, va, THURSDAY, MARCH g. 1906
Attorney Geleral Moody Opens Ar
gument For GoVeinm mt.
HE RlDIcULEs IMMUNITY PLEA

fh hlDlNO IL , lh.i iH I ~ ! TGGN
Declares It Was Na Af..r-Thoueht Of
Meat Packers and II Conferred
Would Cripple the Government In
Enforcing TIE Las.
Chicago. March 2o-Attorncy Cen.
eral w. II. Moody commenced the clos
ing arguments Of the government in
the hearing before tic federal court
Of the immunity pleas advanced by
the meat packers. In opening the ar
gument the attorney gauer-. declared
that the eyes of the whole o. t.e Cnit
ed States were directed 20 th' court
room in which the present hearing
was held. and q rrtel That t-e go,-
ernment Of the United States WIS far
too much in earnest In the present
case 10 pursue. IS the attorneys fer
the packers have intimate sense
less creation OF the law. ic declared
that II wrong had been committed the
government was seeking The punish
ment not OF a corporation bat oi the
living. breathing human beings who
committed the wrong
The government and the people Of
the Unitod states. ne declared. would
be satisfied with nothing less than
that. lie declared that his appear
ance at the bar of the court was m
usual and almost unprecedented. but
the law gave him the right % appear
and after much deliberation hc le..ey.
ed Il ia be- his duty 10 app The
Justification for his action he said.
would be found NOT only in the Inn
portance Of the present case but also
in the fact that II immunity be con.
fcrred on the defendants ou the ground
Of which it he's been asked II would
overthrow the lcaal interpretations o.
the government for almost .o~years
and woull especially cripple the gov
ernment In lbs attempts 10 enforce
the laws OF the land
After reciting tho facts in the filing
Of the pleas of immunity and doc'ar
ing that they We're plainly an after
thought ON tine part Of the defendants
the attorney general continued:
zach one OF these dcfendan's mus'
show ttat te was compelled % give
evidence against himself with regard
to the ofcnse charged against him IN
this Indictment n is my understand
Inc that tie privilege Of the witness
and the Immunity Of the witness Is
personal 10 hims slr lie Is protected
from producing any e,iicnCe or giving
any testimony thot might .ncrimina',
him. II have in nay possession booh
containing ar cutry verified by my
initials. which insr'minates ne. all the
nowore o. fln cofenment cannot take
II from rv pos-o-s.on. because IL is
ny porsoncl riglt under the consti
tuition rot 20 be compelled to give eyi
dcnce AGAINST myself
Attorney Miller representing Ar
mour q Co.. asked: They could com
pei you TO give 70 ND. could they not, II
they did not put you under oath?'
"Of course they could not replied
Attorney General Moody. because
would not give it up. do not require
\ constitution or an immunity statute
If I have got it: 7 hold on to ii until
7 am brought by process of law into
court. and then rely as | have
right to rely. on the protection OF the
constitution. n Mr. Armour or any
one of these defendants was subpoe
naed TO appear before the grand jury
and produce these books OF theirs. the
answer that they ought to make Is thai
they were not if their possession. or II
they produced them. they could mo-
obtain immunity unless the books
they brought contained evidence re-
latlng to some oiiense Of which the
pcrson who brought the books was
guilty"
The attorney general then went OF
TO assert that the pleas in immunity
had no standing because of the alb
sense Of the slightest suggestion OF
compulsory proceedings Of the law
He said he regarded this absence as
decisive Of the present case as a mat
,rr ~ Jaw