Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1907-05-03
PACKERS LOSE IN FIGHT.
UNIFIED STATES JUDGES SUSTAIN
THE GOVERNMENT II. THE
REBATE CASES.
UP TO SUPREME COURT.
Court of Appeals Makes Important Rul-
ings Regarding Interstate Trans
porting of Freight.

ST. PAUL, Mimi, April 29.-Judge
Sanborn today filed the opinion of the
United States circuit court of appeals,
which he had written, affirming the
judgments of the United States district
court for the western district Of Mis-
souri,, against the packers, for accepting
concession of - cents a hundred pounds
from the portion Of the established rate
for the transportation of provisions on
through bills of lading from Kansas
City to Christiania and other points in
foreign countries. Judges Hook and
Adams concur in the opinion.
The lower court imposed penalty of
$4,000 on each of the indicted firms,
and these fines have been affirmed.
First of Rebate Cases.
The defendants in the cases involved
in the decision are the Armour Packing
company, the Swift q Co., Morris u Co.,
and the Cudahy Packing company.
These cases are the first of the so
called rebate cases brought by the United
States against the packers to be de-
termined by the appellate court and will
form the basis for future action until
the supreme court reviews the decision
Conclusions of Court.
The substance of the conclusions
reached by the court are as follows:
l. Elkins' Act - Rebates - Jurisdiction,
wherever transportation conducted there
under.
The giving or receiving of a rebate or
concession whereby property in interstate
or foreign commerce is transported at
less rate than that legally filed and pub,
ltshed, denounced by the Elk1ns Act, ~
Stat, C7OS, PS47, is continuous crime
judiciable in any court of the United States
having jurisdiction Of crimes through whose
district the transportation is conducted.
2. Rebates-Inland rates on through eX-
ports and imports REQUIRED to be filed and
published.
The rates Of transportation from places in
the United States to ports of trans-ship-
ment and from ports of entry to places in
the United States of property In foreign
commerce carried under through bills of
lading are required to be filed and published
by the amended interstate commerce act of
1887, "a Stat C104, P379.
If carried under under an aggregate
through rate which is the sum of the ocean
rate and the rate from or to a place in the
United States, to or from the port of trans
shipment or of entry, the latter rate is re
CURED to be filed and published.
If carried under joint through rate by
virtue of a common control, management
or arrangement of the inland and ocean
carriers, the joint rate is required to be
filed and published.
Upholds the Indictments.
g. Rebates-"Device" of Elkins act imma-
terial-Indictment sufficient without plead
ing it,
The giving or receiving of the rebate or
concession whereby property In interstate
or foreign commerce Is transported at less
than the established rate, is the essence of
the offense denounced by the pertinent
paragraph of the Elkins act.
The "device" by which the concession
transportation is brought about is not an
essential element Of the crime and it is I'M
necessary to plead it in the indictment.
The meaning of the clause 'by any de-
vice whatever in that paragraph is, dt-
rectly or indirectly, in any way whatever.
+. Rebates-COntract to maintain estab
lished rate ineffective after higher rate es-
tablished-no defense to charge of recev-
ing less than filed and published rate.
A contract between carrier and ship
per to transport the latter'S goods in inter-
tahlished rate for a definite time, is inef-
fective after q higher rate has been filed
and published as required by law.
The time during which a rate different
from the agreed rate is established by filing
and publishing is excepted from the term of
such contract by virtue of the national acts
to regulate commerce which are a part
thereof.
Such contract constitutes no defense to
q charge of giving or receiving a rebate or
concession from the filed and published
rate.
5. Criminal intent-Simple purpose to do
forbidden act which is not nahum in Sc is
sufficient
The only criminal intent requisite to
is not nahum in Sc is the purpose to do the
act in violation of the statute.
No moral turpitude or wicked intent IS
essential to conviction of such crime.