Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1907-01-04
Judge Lands N United States
Court lll| al3chlcago, Hands Down
as Important Opinion.
DEFENDANTS DEMURRER oVERRULED
fSeat Trust Will Have to stand
T'iaI for Eight ct the Rebate In
dietments-Elkins Law constl.u..
tional ana canno. be Violated
To Enforce the Will Of Congress.
(By Associated Press.l

CHICAGO, ILLS, Jan. 32Judse
Landist in the United States court
today oyerruled the demurrer of the
standard OH company to eight of
the rebate indictments pending
against that corporation but sus-
tanned the demurrer as to two other
indictments because OF the technical
defects. The court ruled against the
defendant's contention that the Ell.
klns law was enacted really to pro.
hiblt the employment OF indirect
methods to obtain preferential rates
IL being the defendants contention
that 1t was violation of the law
II railway company dealing direct
with shipper, gave that shipper
cur rate. The court also ruled
AGAINST the defendants claim that
ire provisions of the Elkins law re-
1uirlng shippers to adhere to
Hubhslcd rate was void, as being
against that provision of the Inter
state Commerce law which required
carriers to transport property for
reasonable rate, the court holding.
that the carriers and shippers were
h9lh required TO adhere to the pub.
ltltei rate.
Iae ceuit ruled against the der II.
dlr:'s contention that the pruvi.
ion.>,f the Interstate Commerce law.
recurring carriers to publish tcrmi
nslp charges, inasmuch as the en-.
signor would have only little, If
any II u rest in the question. Tao
law plainly was intended to be bind
ingl on consignees.
&fter observing that the Elkins law
was repealed by the rate law ana
that unless there was statute
keeping alive the future prosecution
OF offenses which had been COM
mitted against the Elkins law pr:or
toFits appeal. the court quoted sec
tion 10 of the revised statutes of
the United States.
TIT law" said the court, "has
been sattacked here as an unwnrran-
ted attempt by Congress that enact
ed y to curtail the authority of sue
ceeding Congresses by limiting In
advance the effect to be given to
their enactments. 1t is rather the
substitution of new rule to be
observed by the courts in the con-
be enacted. That under such old
rule ssis restored each succeeding
Cclgress intends that the countts
shallT be guided by the new rule n
giving effect to their enactmenys.
se6ms to me beyond question.
1T is the duty of the court" SAIL
Judge J4andis, ito enforce the Will
OF Congress- as explained in the writ
ten. enactment. In the ascertaInment
ofSthat will, | am not at liberty to
ignore the ultimate object OF the
law. That object was the estab-
lisllnlent OF uniform railroad rates,
reasonable in amount The former
lazy had failed to accomplish this,
and was therefore strengthened in:
stead of being wiped off the books
as 1t had served it's purpose and
additional and several more abili-
ties created and more drastic rene.
dies and penalties authorized.
my opinion is that the so-called
saving clause in section ten was in.
serted for, the sole purpose of de.
finitely prescribing the rule of pro-
.cedure that should control the prose
cqtion OF cases Incorporating in var
ioiis stages in the courts, thus avoid
ing the confusion and controversy
E which experience has shown must
oterwise have resulted"