The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1908-08-21
GOVERNMENT ASKS
FOR REHEARING IN
STANDARD OIL CASE

should undertake practically TO wipe
the interstate commerce act from the
statutes.
The petition states before the gov
ernment Is required TO try this case
under the rigid rule OF construction
ldid down by this court, is Il not man
ifestly fair and right in the interest
not only OF justice in this case. but In
the interest Of final and definite con-
struction OF this important statute,
that Judgment be taken OF the highest
tribunal OF the nation?"
The government contends that he
court Of appeals in its opinion has
laid down an erroneous rule for de-
termining the number of offenses.
The government contends that zach
shipment Is the basis Of a distinct Of
fense; and that I'm this Ease each car
load was a separate shipment.
The circuit court OF appeals has held
that there Is but one offense for eacli
settlement for freight,
The government cites against this
,he opinion OF Presiding Judge Gross
rup IN the case OF United States VS.
Hanley, n Fed Rep. 572. 675, IN
WI ich that judge laid down an exactly
contrary rule TO the one which he
laid down in the Standard Oil case.
The government contends that the
rule laid down by the court of appeals
Is contrary to the principles OF the FL
lins act and leaves 1t TO the shipper
and carrier to eject for how many Of
fenses they will be prosecuted and
how much they shall be fined
The government contends In the pc
tltion that the court Of appeals has
done a great injustice to trial Judge
Lands in misstatlng what he did IN
connection igith the imposition OF the
fine on the Standard OIL company
The circuit court Of appeals In It's
opinion charges that Judge lands as.
sumed TO fine the Standard Oil com
pany OF New Jersey, and imposed the
large fine for the reason that he was
satisfied that the STANDARD Oil com
pany OF New Jersey was not a virgin
offender"
The government in It's petition that
Judge Lands never referred to the
Standard OIL company OF New Jersey
I'm this connection and that the Ian
guage used was used IN connection
with the Standard OIL company Of In
diana. and that nowhere were the pro
ceedings directed or pretended TO be
directed against the Standard Oi
company of New Jersey.
The government takes issue witt
The court Of appeals that Judge Ian
dis proceeding in the case amounted
! 10 a strange doctrine in Auglo-SaXoi
Jurisprudence !" and says that the pro
cecdings OF Judge Landis are in ac
| cordance with the rule of proceedurl
| pointed ont by Mr. Bishop in his worl
on criminal law as one OF the elemeu
| tary principals of that jurisprudene
| recognized from the earliest days
The government takes issue wit
| the circuit court of appeals as TO il
proposition that a defendant cannot b
fined more than the value 81 the proI
erty which he possesses and state
that this rule is an innovation j
criminal law and If applied would Dc
stroy the enforcement OF most sta
utes.
The government claims that In
facts before the court of appeals jui
tify the imposition OF the penalty II
fiicted by the trial Judge.
1t appears from the record of III
circuit court of appeals that the n,
profit of the business OF the Standar
ION Company OF Indiana the corpor
lion that Judge Landis fined, for th
years during which the violations {
ihe law for which II was convicte
were committed and including Ii
year in which II was indicted amour
ed 10 $33.5S3 ,20s.S0.
on this point the petition states,
1--WE respectfully call the attentic
OF the court to the statement OF II
Standard Oil Company OF Indiana {
file in this case. referred TO by Il
court in its opinion and treated
proper for consideration In deiermi
ing whether or not the penalty was e
lcessiye.
The statement shows with referen'
to the assets and liabilities and proh
lOf the Standard Oil Company OF lnt
ana, the following.
Standard oil Co. (lndiana.)