The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-08-04
construction Of the road. A more abhorrent

heresy could not be conceived.
There il no more reason for the claim Of
natural right to private contract for the
exercise by a railway company Of the
public power with which IL Is endowed
| than there would be for the claim OF similar
right TO private contract with the collector
Of customs or tax assessor for a secret
valuation Of property. 1t is the defend
ants position that the commerce CLAUSE
does not empower Congress to forbid and
make criminal the defendants act In ac-
cepting from the carrier a less rate than
that published and filed by the carrier. as
required by law
In subsequent paragraph OF the decision
Judge Lands defined the interstate COM
merce law. He also granted that the power
Of Congress to act in these matters Is I'M
showing that q joint tariff existed. Judge
Lands said:
at was insisted by the defendant that the
evidence did not show any common arrange
ment between the Chicago and Alton and the
tinuous carriage from Whiting to East st.
| Louis, as charged in the indictment. The
evidence did show the filing and publication
| Of a joint tariff schedule Of the Chicago and
Alton and Chicago Terminal Company.
Louis the IS cent rate, shown by tarin
| No. "a to be the ChicaRo-East 81. Louis rate.
Furthermore. these two companies main
tanned a joint agency at the intersection OF
| their roads at Cnappeu Tor the Crdn6aCtlOn Oh
the business of both at that point, which
| consisted largely OF the Standard Oil traffic
from Whiting to East st. Louis.
in addition to this, the evidence shows
the movement OF defendants property by
the Chicago Terminal Company that COM
pany not looking 70 the defendant for it's
compensa ion. but relying solely upon the
Alton company therefor. The whole course
of business, from the publication and filing
Of the joint schedule to the payments OF the
| f-.t~lN .kaA.oa oAnnlsafxyaIf ahnuva chat
these two companies were operating under
"a common arrangement for the transpor-
tation OF this property.
Motive il not material in q case where
ths proof is clear that il was the defendant
who committed The crime. Motive may
be inquired into whef necessary to deter
mine the ultimate fact, when In dispute
as TO who committed the crime. h real
question here is whether the defendant
accepted the concession knowingly, and
in determining this it need not be affirma-
lively shown that the defendant had actual
knowledge Of the lawful rate. The defend
ant must be presumed To have known that
which "a diligent endeavor made by IN honest
man in good faith to ascertain the lawful
rate would nave disclosed to him..
THE burden OF this diligent endeavor
il not to he diminished or increased by
the supposed existence or absence OF a
lawful rate on some other road equal in
amount to the rate accepted by tbs shipper.
To adopt defendants contention would be
to impose upon the occasional shipper.
who cannot employ a traffic manager
and who is not expert In traftc matters.
a more rigid requirement than that inn
posed upon the continuous shipper. by
excusing the latter on account OF what his
large business might enable him to know OF
rates on other roads from penalties which
would he imposed upon the former for the
same act"
The Court subsequently held that the
| shipper must know and not assume IN
he has to pay in freight rates, He said
on that subject:
"The Court is not impressed by the dole
ful predictions Of counsel for the defendant
as to the hardships upon the honest shipping
public TO he anticipated from the enforce
ment of this rule, The honest mar who
tenders a commodity for transportation
by a railway company will not be fraudu-
lently misled by that company into allowing
it to haul his property Tor less than the
law authorizes it to collect. For the car
rier thus to deceive the shipper would be
TO deliberately incriminate itself. to its
own ~pecuniary detriment, which IL may
safely be trusted not to do.
I The only man liable to get into trouble
is he who. being In control OF the routing Of
large volumes Of traffic. conceives a scheme
1 for the evasion OF the law and connives
with the railway officers for its execution"
The defendant is held liable on each Of
/ fence and the law on that point is quoted.
The plea Of the Standard Oil Company
4 To limit Inc penalties To three tailed, and
every other loophole made by the defence
was closed.
Continuing his decision Judge Landis
said:
"The proof is silent a. TO what number
| OF cars, IL more han one. constituted ship
ments on specific orders, no evidence having
been offered by either party on that point.
Because Of this the defendants counsel
urged the Court grant a new trial, the
claim being that such a showing was a
necessary part OF the Government case"
In the opinion Of the Court the evidence
fully justified the jury in finding the de-
PENDANT guilty on each Of the ,462 counts
In concluding the decision and imposing
the maximum fines the Court said:
"One thing remains. Ii must not be as
sumed that in this jurisdiction these laws
may be ignored. II they are not obeyed
they will be enforced! The plain demands
Of justice require that the facts disclosed
in this proceeding be submitted to a Grand
Jury with a view to the consideration OF the
conduct OF the other party to these trans
actions.
let an order be entered for a panel OF
sixty men, r%eturnable at 10 O'Clock on the
morning Of August "a. The United States
District Attorney is directed to proceed
accordingly"