The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1908-11-09

] 'AAAN "a MAaA AaNAA AAANAA ANA AUUU DUE
poses, and two indictments for the
keeping for sale the meat Of calves
less than four weeks old +. A. Rich
and Victor l. Spear, both former Cat
Tie commissioners, were indicted for
neglect of official duty"
The final disposition of these in
| dictments was at the March term.
! 1907, of the Chittenden County court.
! The Rendering Company pleaded
guilty to each of the four indictments.
and fines aggregating three thousand
dollars and costs were imposed Upon
the plea of guilty by the Rendering
Company the indictments against its
manager, Brigham We're nolle pros.
] sed"
AT the same terai respondent f. A
Rich pleaded guilty 10 the indictment
for neglect Of duty and was fined
three hundred dollars and costs"
AT the same term the respondent
Victor /. Spear was tried by the court
on the indictment against him for ne.
glect Of duty Judgment guilty. fined
one hundred dollars and costs"
! During the investigation before the
Grand Jury OF September term, 1906,
the Rendering Company was required
TO produce certain of its books and
papers for use as evidence. This II
refused to do and It appeared that the
books and papers demanded, We're
without the State of Vermont, having
been removed by the company at
about the time the investigation was
commenced There being doubt
whether the then existing law was
sufficient TO compel the production Of
such books and papers, there was pre-.
| sented bill TO the Judiciary Commit
tee OF the Senate and House at the
opening of the session of the General
Assembly OF 1906. The bill required
| the production of books and papers by
corporations and making them punish
able for contempt for failure to com
ply The legislature promptly re-
sponded TO this request and passed
what Is known as Act No as OF the
Acts of 1906 (Section 42524256, Pub.
Stat inclusive
Under the provisions of this act
proceedings were commenced to COM
pei the production Of the books and
papers which had been refused. The
Rendering Company complied in part
and in part refused Accordingly
petition was brought to the Court
that the company be dealt with for
contempt On October 81 1906. the
company appeared in Court TO answer
to contempt proceedings The issue
of fact was Joined as to whether IL
had complied with the notice as far as
il was able The court adjudged the
company in contempt and imposed up
on It a fine of three thousand dollars.
To this judgment the company ex-
cepted, alleging that the law was I'M
constitutional"
The cause was heard at the Janu-
airy term, 1907. OF the Supreme Court
of Vermont The Judgment of the
| County Court was affirmed (S0Vt5jj
A writ of error was brought by the
company TO the Supreme Court OF the
! United States and the cause was
there heard at the October term. 1907.
The Supreme Court of the United
States affirmed the judgment OF the
Supreme Court of Vermont l2O7 T. S
! SD. The re upon the fine and costs
in the contempt proceedings were
| paid and / ask due consideration 20
be given the above facts In consider
ing the propositions contained In Mr..
Brooks accommodation in the diff.
feTent articles he has written on this
subject. as they all point straight to
the same conclusion. for in one place
he says. what In effect means, that
had / taken all the diseased carCasses
to the Rendering plant 80 per cent or
| more OF the cost TO the state Of in the
last two years might have been saved.
now In this same connection Ia a later
| article he states. that the carcass OF
every animal killed Is worth twenty
ave cents per HUNDRED for fertilizer
and taking q for granted that his
| connection with this rendering plant
enable him 10 state the price correct.
~. let as see how it will figure out
have ascertained from the tariff OF
the Rutland Rendering Company that
IL would cost on an average, for car
loads Of 10000 pounds, fifteen cents
per hundred and for less than 10000
pound shipments from % to 80 cents
per hundred. for Rutland Railroad
transportation alone Added 10 this
would be- the cost OF driving the cat
tie from the farm TO the Rutland Rail
road station. the loading and un
loading and getting to the plant a
Burlington together with the cost of ;
reliable man 10 accompany each ship
ment and see that each and ever!
carcass is destroyed beyond all pos
sible use for food purposes. so as TO b'
able TO make oath 90 that fact as re
CURED by law. and with the prcsen
capacity OF said plant for tanking tht
would require an attendance OF sever
AL DAYS ~ The plant for the disposition
OF eaon car load OF cattle. Now vii
some or, who Is good In figures pl'as'
tell me where that fifty per cen
as ne says. OF about one hundred
thousand dollars. Is 10 be gotten on
Of these carcasses. provided this CON
| missioner with the consent OF the GOV
ernor had seen 10 TO enter into q bus
mess leal with this. the only render
NIX plant In the state OF sufficient ca
1acity to begin 10 handle these carcas
SEES In carload lots. Now Mr. BrocI
knows very we'll that for iertilize
alone there Is no money for the stat
taking the condemned oattl, 10 hl
N any other rendering plant m oi on
lf the state
rha only way that the state cal
realize any such sums as he names 1
sell q large portion Of the carcagae
/, Tor food purposes and e is wei
! known fact that the mere suspicion
that this was being done two year
ago caused more people to desert th
Republican party and vote the fusiol
ticket In the state election than nj
the other arguments used by the lus
ion speakers and newspapers of Ina
campaign. and II was also the caus
, Of the present law, as II was unQucO
npdlv tho tamnpr of the legislature u