Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-06-12

company when 1t received the product, and
In turn each of the connecting lines OF tne
railroad and the steamship company knew
such fact when receiving such proauet'
then 1t is not controlling that the receipts,
contracts writings or bills OF lading were
through contracts or bills of ladfng.
Judge Mcpherson said that in the case
on trial there is no question as to the rea-
sonableness of the rates nor as to the em-
cheney of the service but the question 49,
Did the defendant packing company re-
ceive unlawful concessions In making saio
shipments? He recited the fact that Whlie
their contract on the basis OF the 2s-cenl
rate was In effect they were aware OF the
fact that the Burlington railway and It's
connecting lines had filed 30-cent tariH
with the interstate commerce commlssloh-
The court declared that as matter OF law
the question as to the validity OF the pack
ers' contract was not practical question:
because and for the reason that the de-
fendant company had no right to make
contract that would extend beyond the
time of filing new schedules with the COM
mission at Washington. fixing the rate 20
the general public at higher and dinerent
rate than that covered by the contract.
He continued: And when the amenda-
tory rates east of the Mississippi river was
filed with the commission August o. ana
the defendant knew of the same, 1t could
not knowingly receive less rate or con-
cession than that paid by the general pub
lie without being guilty OF receiving an uh-
lawful concession provided that the same
was thus received by any kind of device
as hereinafter recited. This is so because,
the right. privilege and liberty of contract
usually existing between all persons and
corporations is modified and controlled by
that provision of the Constitution which
gives to Congress the right to regulate COM
merce between the states and foreign ma
tions."
Judge Mcpherson, in concluding. said:
1T is important for you to determine
whether the concession of II cents per hun
dred after August G, from the rates, COW
cred by the schedules then on file with the
commission, was the result of device and
whether done with guilty intent. 1t must
have been, before you can convict, the re-
suit of a device and with a guilty intent,
because, If the shipper did not know 1t was
receiving concessions and did not have
guilty intent, no crime would be committed.
AS to device is meant that which is devised
or formed by design; a contrivance: prof.
ect; a scheme to deceive; stratagem, OF
an artifce."
The court overruled the motion of counsel
for the defendant packers, and made the
following Instructions
l. The jury will return verdict for
defendant.
q The indictment in this case is insult
ficent to warrant a finding of guilt as
against the defendant.
8. The evidence in this case is insult
ficient to warrant finding of guilt against
defendant.
A. If the shipment in question was
through export shipment to a foreign port
in a foreign country. then the verdict
should be for defendant.
8. If you fail to find that defendant did
some act in the western district of Mis-
souri,. then the verdict should be for de-
fendant.
&. The fact that the transportation of
the shipment was through the western dis
trict of Missouri is not sufficient to vest
jurisdiction in this court, and the pro-
visions of the act of Congress of February
49, 1903 (32 Statutes-at-Large, SAD in SO far
as they purport to authorize a prosecution
in any district through which the trans
portation may have been conducted, is
as to this defendant violative of section
2 of article of the Constitution of the
United States and of article g of the amend
ments to said Constitution.
The case was given to the jury at 1910
am.