The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1906-12-07

that basis-that u.s. IL this discrimination
in favor of this particular shipper was
made with an Is instead of 70 cent
rate and the tariff rate was maintained
as against their competitors-the re-
suit might be and not improbably would
be that their competitors would be driven
out of business. This crime Is one which
in It's nature Is deliberate and premedi-
tated. think over fortnight elapsed
between the date Of Palmer's letter re-
questing the reduced rate and the answer
OF the railroad company deciding to
grant 1t, and then for months after
wards this business was carried on and
these claims for rebates submitted month
after month and checks in payment OF
them drawn month after month. Such
a violation of the law, In my opinion, In
Its essential nature, Is a very much
more heinous act than the ordinary
fore criminal courts constantly for pun
ishment and which arise from sudden
passion or temptation. This crime in
this case was committed by men Of
education and of large business expert
ence, whose business standing in the
community was such that they might
have. been expected to set an example
Of n to law the main
the security Of their property depends.
1t was committed on behalf of a great
railroad corporation, which, like other
railroad corporations, has received gra-
able privileges for the publics conven-
fence and it's 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
between different citizens or different
classes Of citizens; This crime in its
and proof of which 1t is very difficult
to obtain. The interstate commerce act
was passed in 1887, nearly 20 years ago.
Ever, since that time complaints of the
granting of rebates by railroads has been
common, urgent, insistent, and altho
the congress has repeatedly past legs-
latlon endeavor1ng to put stop to this
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 / am informed, this case
and one recently brought in Philadelphia
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
have ever been brought in this country,
east or west. Now, under these circum-
in a case in which the proof is so clear
and the facts are so fragrant, it is the
duty OF the court to fix penalty which
shall in some. degree be commensurate
with the gravity of the offense AS be-
tween the two defendants, in my opinion,
the principal penalty should be imposed
on the corporation. The traffic manager
in this. 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
is, that the defendant Pomeroy, for each
of the six offenses upon which he has
been convicted, be fined the sum of 1000.
making six fines, amosnting in, all to the
- H. IAfA
New York Central & Hudson River Rail-
road company, for each of the six crimes
of which 1t has been convicted, be fined
the sum of $4,000, making six fines
Of sl08OOo, and Judgment TO that effect
will be entered in this case"
Evasion by Technicalities.
In connection with this matter, would
like to call attention to the very unsat-
isfactory state OF our criminal law, re-
sulting in large part from the habit of
courts on technicalities absolutely un-
connected with the merits of the case,
and where there Is no attempt to show
that there has been any failure Of sub
act a law providing something to the
No judgment shall be set aside or new
trial granted in any cause, civil or GRIM
jury or the improper admission or re-
lection of evidence or for error as to any
matter of pleading or procedure unless,
in the opinion of the court to which the
application is made, after an examina-
lively appear that the error complained
OF has resulted in miscarriage of
justice.
In my last message l suggested the en-
actment of law in connection with the
issuance of injunctions, attention hav-
ing been sharply drawn to the matter
by the demand that the right OF apply
ing injunctions In labor cases should be
wholly abolished. II Is at least doubtful
whether law abolshing altogether the
use of injunctions in such cases would
stand the test Of the courts; In which
case of course the legislation would be
be wrong altogether to prohibit the use
Of injunctions. 1t is criminal to permit
sympathy with criminals to weaken our
hands in upholding the law; and If men
violence there should be no impairment
of the power Of the courts to deal with
them in the most summary and effective
way possible. But SO far as possible the
abuse of the power. should be provided
last year.
lodged in the hands of the judiciary q
subject to the possibility of grave abuse
1t is power that should be exercised
with extreme care and should be sub
ject to the jealous scrutiny of all men,
and condemnation should be. meted out
as much to the judge who fails to use
it boldly when necessary as to the Judge
who uses it wantonly or oppressively
fit for his office will enjoin any resort
to violence or intimidation. especially by
may be of the rights Of the original quar-
rel. There must be no hesitation in
dealing with disorder. But there must
likewise be no such abuse of the in
junctve power as is implied in forbidding
laboring men to strive for their own bet
terment in peaceful and lawful ways;
nor must the injunction be used merely
to aid some big corporation in carrying
out schemes for its own aggrandizement
1t must be remembered that prelim-
mary injunction in a labor case, IL
granted without adequate proof (even
when authority can be found to support
the conclusions of law on which IL is
founded), may often settle the dispute
between the parties; and therefore IL
improperly granted may do irreparable
wrong. Yet there are many judges who