The Paducah evening sun. [volume] (Paducah, Ky.) 1906-1929, 1908-07-23
THE STANDARD OIL DECISION.

THE STANDARD OIL DECISION.
Let those Of us who think the
Standard Oil company deserved the
maximum fine on general principles,
pause and consider whittier the cur
rent of our passions is sweeping us;
for IL we are demanding vengeance,
instead Of justice, we are no better at
heart than a night rider; and. that
same vengeance beyond the law will
come back on us swift and sure with
out the protection of the law. The
reversal of Judge lands by the
court of appeals only emphasizes the
difficulties we encounter in dealing
with corporate rapacity, and--to use a
time-worn expression - predatory
wealth. But that will not justify us
in wrong-doing ourselves. II Judge
Lands put himself "above the law"
in fining the Standard Oil company,
of New Jersey, when II was only the
Standard Oil company of Indiana,
that was on trial, we are glad the cir
cult court of appeals had regard for
the rights OF the defendant and re-
versed the lower court. II encourages
US to believe that the court would
have regard for our legal rights be-
fore 1t.
Judge lands and the circuit court
of appeals take widely varying views
on this point. The circuit court Of
appeals assumed that the two COM
panies are distinct entities. Judge
lands regarded the Standard OIL
company of Indiana. as simply the
Standard Oil company, of New Jer-
sey, parading under an alias. and he
treated the defendant just as he
would have treated John Smith, burg
lar, who gave the name of Bill Jones
when arrested. The fiction of a name
did not cut any figure In the indlct-
ment and punishment of the offender,
since the identity of the offender was
established.
That idea was simple. and easily
srasped. and caught the fancy of the
multitude, who have little patience
with the complexities of the law. But
We hope Judge Kenesaw Mountain
lands was not prompted by the de-
sire to please the multitude in his de-
cision. II the Standard Oil company
Is guilty OF the offense charged. II
should be punished; but only after
due process of law. Our own libertle.
are involved in the trial of the Stand
ard Oil company to the extent that,
| If II can be. outrageously dealt with
the precedent established would apply
to any one OF us, natural person OF
corporation, before the court in a
similar manner, whether in a case in
volving the same state CT facts or not
We can see how John Smith, OF
New Jersey, committing a crime in
Indiana under an alias, and The
Standard OIL of New Jersey, owning
controlling interest in the Standard
Oil of Indiana, which committed 4
crime, may stand before the court il
very different attitudes. For In
stance the New Jersey corporation
would be no more guilty in that case
than would some really innocent
stockholder of the Indiana corpora.
ton. for it would be nothing more
than a stakeholder. On the other
hand, If the Indiana corporation /,
just a blind for the New Jersey com.
pany, the latter should not be per.
mitted to make use OF mask and ar
alias to escape its desert. II the Law
does not reach such state of facts
the law should speedily be amended
so as to effect a remedy.
In reality. We fear the STANDARD
Oil company has only deferred jus
tice, and added fuel against the dal
Of wrath. by its method OF defense.
Il