The Washington herald., 1907-08-05
MONDAY. AUGUST 5. 1907.
The Standard Oil Fine.

Opinions will doubtless differ as to the
justice and expediency of Judge Lands
imposition of the maximum fine for the
punishment of the Standard Oil Com
pany's violations Of the Federal anti-re-
bate law. There is no hard and fast rule
that may be applied in such a case. the
law leaving the amount of the punish
ment 10 the discretion of the judge. and
the exercise of that discretion being de-
termined by considerations of public
policy as well as of abstract justice
Judge Lands has taken the view that
public policy requires a most notorious
and persistent offender against the law
to be dealt with to the full extent of the
penalties prescribed by the statute, for
the purpose Of applying an effective cor
rective and deterrent. In his opinion he
gives reasons for applying the maximum
penalty, and anticipates the objection 10
that action on constitutional grounds:
And where the only possible motive Of the crime
"a the enhancement Of dividends, and the only
punishment authorized is a fine great caution must
be exercised by the court lest the fixing Ct a small
amount encourages the defendant TO future viola
tions by csteeming the penalty 20 be in the nature
Of license The defendant argues that % hold il
for l,ss2 Oenses would be a violation Of the con-
stitutiOnal prohibition against the imposition Of ex-
cessive fines. and Il is urged that Congress could
never have intended TO confer upon the court such
power It is the view OF the court that FOR the law
to take from one Of its corporate creatures as
penalty for the commission Of a dividend pro
dueing crime less than onethird Of its net revenues
l.
Of the imposition Of an excessive fine and surely 10
do this would not be the exercise Of as much real
power as is employed when sentence is imposed
taking from human being one dag Of his liberty
Whether a fine of one-thlrd the reve-
nues Of a corporation earned during the
period OF violation of the law, though
warranted by the terms OF the statute.
is out Of proportion TO the offense, is
largely a matter Of opinion. It is pointed
out by Standard Oil representatives that
the fine is fifty times the value Of the oil
shipments mentioned in the indictment and
about three-fourths the annual dividends
Of the company. When il fs remembered
that the Standard is under indictment for
similar Offenses in two other jurisdictions.
1t will be seen that the imposition of the
maximum penalty in the event of con-
victions in all pending cases would i'm
pose a liability upon the offending cor
poration probably more than half the
entire value Of its property. It would
seem that the imposition Of a heavy fine
bearing some relation to the revenues IN
lawfully gained by the acceptance Of re-
bates would have answered every re-
quirement OF public policy, and would
have been quite as effective in prevent
ing a recurrence Of the offense, while it
would have been sure Of the approval
Of the higher courts.
But the Standard Oil Company, in the
inflictlon Of this tremendous penalty, has
only reaped what it has sown through
long years Of open defiance Of govern
mental authority. Judge Lands took oc-
casion TO deliver a scathfng arraignment
of the course Of its officers in the par
ticular instances Of wrong-doing proven
in his court, wherein he declared they
had wounded society more deeply than
he who counterfeits the coin or steals
letters from the mail They have long
escaped punishment, and their immunity
has seemed impregnable. but they have
at last been brought TO book. Judge Ian
dis was not dealing with a first offender.
or with an occasional lapse from virtue.
but with a settled and long-continued
policy Of rebating. with practices which
the government has been trying to curb
for twenty years. As a confirmed and
unrepentant lawbreaker, the Standard
was given the extreme punishment of the
law. We have no doubt the general sen
timent will be that it deserves all it got,
on general principles, whether the appli-
cation Of a maximum fine in the case at
bar was justly proportioned to the par
ticular offense or not.