Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-02-25
G A BLOW 1UG STANDARD
Adverse Decision in Great
Northern Suit Knocks Prop
From Trust

decided that the law. passed in the
summer of 1906, did not repeal the Ell
kins law as to any otfenSes committed
prior to that time.
This was one of the contentious
made by John S Miller in behalf of the
Standard Oil Company in the big case
tried in Chicago
The decision of the supreme court
yesterday, as read by Justice White
dsp"ses of this contention absolutely
and it may therefore be considered as
points in the case in which Il $29,000,-
600 fine was imposed by Judge Lam
dis
The court holds that the Hepburn act
OF 1906 did repeal the Elkins law, as it
was intended to do, by re-enacting and
remodclinS it, but it did not prevent
any prosecution for illegal rebates Civ
en- by railroads before June 30 1906,
when the Hepburn law was enacted.
The result OF this decision is that
the Great Northern railway and a
number OF its officials. who We're in
/ on fifteen counts for violation of the
i Elllins act. will have to pay the fines
| imposed, the decision of the lower
court being affirmed by the court of
! last resort.
1t is a curious thing that in reach
/ ing the decision the opinion handed
down yesterday specifically refers to
the Standard Oil case, and sustains
| Judge Lands SO far the question of
the repeal of the t,lhinS law is con-
Cerned. altho as Il matter of course the
supreme court takes pains to make ii
clear that the decision on this point
does not, in any way, commit the court
as to the other features of the Stand
ard Oil case.
AS this feature, however, was one of
the strongest points made by Mr.. Mil
Ter in behalf Of the Standard Oil Com
pany. the decision yesterday is likely
to be accepted as the forcrunner of one
generally sustaining Judge Lands as
to the legal side of the big case. with
cut going into the question as to the
sweeping nature of the fine.
After citing the Standard Oil decis-
ion in the lower court Justice White,
in the decision he read Yesterday, says
Significantly
in citing the cases in question. we
do not wish to be considered as inn
plying that we express amy opsnion as
to doctrines which they may announce
upon other subjects than the one now
before us. We say this because u may
be that some Of the other subjects with
which some of the cited cases deal
may hereafter come before us Tor de-
cision and therefore we prefer not,
even by indirection. to leave room for
the slightest implication that we eN-
press an opinion as to such other is
sues
Great Northern Case Vital.
The Great Northern case which was
decided today is an extremely impor-
tant one in itself because it will gov
ern whole string of cases in which
prosecutions were begun by the gov
eminent just after the passage of the
Hepburn law, but under the provisions
were committed while that act was
still in full force.
The Hepburn act expressly provided
that the Elkins law should remain in
effect as to all cases then pending in
the United States courts. There is no
dispute about that.
1t WAS asserted in the Great North
ern case in Minnesota and in the
STANDARD Oil case in Chicago that if !
railroad had given a rebate under the
Eliins law. and prosecution had not /
been begun before the passage of the
Hepburn act. the effect of the repeal I
was to relieve those railroads from
prosecution altogether. That was the I
sensational point argued before Judge
Lands.
In the Great Northern case it was
practically admitted that rebates were
given of 20 cents a hundred pounds
on grain shipped from Minneapolis to |
Seattle for account of the w. P. DeV-
ereaux company during May, June,
July and August, 1905.
The Hepburn bill. as have eN !
planned was put on the statute books
June 30. 1906
The Indictment against tho Great
Northern railroad and its officials for
illegal rebates to the W. p. DevcreauX
company was not found until Novem /
Der. 1906.
The railroad company, after admit
ting the facts, insisted that inasmuch
as the prosecution was not begun be-
fore the Hepburn law went into eff
feet it was immune. The district court
of Minnesota instructed the jury to
find the defendants guilty on an agreed
case Of facts. and the plain question
as to the repeal, brought up then and
subsequently revived in the Standard
Oil case at Chicago. was the only thing
really under consideration in the de-
csion yesterday.
Justice White Explains Case.
The points at. issue in this case were
clearly stated by Justice White, who
has the reputation for lucidity of his
opinions. when he said:
at is insisted on behalf Of the rail-
way company that the Elllins act was
amended and re-enacted by section
of the Hepburn law. and that there
by the repeal of the Elkins act was ac-
and that the express terms
Of the Hepburn law manifest tn" in
tention of congress that no offense
committed against the FL
lins act would be prosecuted. unless
the prosecution was then pending.
'"rhe government while not chal
longing the doctrine that where GRIM