New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1906-02-01
FOR ROGERS
Justice GildersleeUe to 47cait Ms
sour Courts Decision.

Justice Gildersleeve in the Supreme Court,
yesterday decided that Henry H Rogers need
not answer at this time certain questions in the
suit Of Missouri against the Standard Oil Com
pany, because the same questions We're at issue
in similar suit in Missouri. The motion of
-. Hadley denied without prejudice and
with leave to renew upon the same papers Tor
other papers, if the Attorney General desires to
do so
In his decision Justice Gidersleeve says;
Under the circumstances. I am Q opinion
that due regard for the court OF original Jurs-
dictiOn demands that this court should wait the
decision OF the Supreme Court of Missouri. and
nor AT ms tne consider the proprlety OF com
pelilng the witness Rogers TO answer any ques-
lion relating 10 stock ownership i'm the re-
spOndent companies
In view of this Justice Gildersleeves action
yesterday caused considerab bic surprise to both
sides especially as both Attorney General Had
ley and the lawyers for the Standard Oil had
joined in asking the justice to reserve decision
until the Missouri court had given its ruling
Justice Gildersleeve said in effect in his ruling
that he would do that. and he did not give any
definite order in the case
Henry Wollman. who is associated with At
torney General Hadey lu the case. said in
regard the opinion.
MIR Justice Gildersleeve's opinion. as l under
stand it is in effect this That il the Supreme
Court of Missouri, in the case of Adams. another
witness. new pending before it. decides that sim
liar questions To those asked of Mr.. Rogers are
material. the here will order Mr.. Rogers to
answer, ana may say, III view OF Justice Glider
sleeves statement at the end OF the oral argu-
ment, that he considered the questions material
the result will follow II the Supreme Court Of
Missouri does not. in the Adams case. pass upon
the question OF materially. We asked Mr.. Justice
Gildersleeve in case ne concluded that the point
of materially was pending in Missouri. TO suspend
making order in the Rogers until after the
decision was handed down In Missouri, and that is
what he did to-day. Taking into consideration the
time when the Adams argued before the
be handed down at Jefferson City within very
few days
our adversaries contended before the New-York
court that upon the refusal of Adams. "A witness
who appeared before eX-Judge Anthony. who was
70 answer similar questions 70 those asked Mr..
Rogers. Judge Anthony had asked the Missouri
Supreme Court to determine not only whether they
We're privileged. hut also whether they
teriaI We commended that the sole question that
Judge Anthony referred the Missouri court was
whether or not the questions privileged
crimnate MIN. and that Judge Anthony did not
refer the question IF Dateriality thar court. and
that therefore Mr. Rogers was not exempted from
answering as ne had not claimed the privilege.
We nd not then. and We do not now. believe that
the question of matcriality is pending before the
Missouri court. and you will see that Justice Gil
only that il may be involved in the before
the supreme Court OF Missouri
1t is believed that the opinion handed
down by Justice GidersleevA will delay the
examination in this city. as even If there should
whether Mr.. Ryan shall answer the questions
there are plenty Of other witnesses to he exam
ined. By mutual consent the examination
which was TO be continued to-day. has been
postponed until after Lincoln's Birthday