Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1908-07-25
HOT PARAGRAPHS TAKEN FROM
STANDARD Oil DECISION.

No monarch, no parliament, no tri.
bunal of western Europe, for centu-
ries, has pretended to have the right
to punish except after due trial under
all the forms of the law. Can that
rightfully be done here. on no other
basis than the judges personal belief
that the party marked by him for
punishment deserves punishment. If
so, it is because the man who happens
to be the judge is above the law.
Would a cab driver, convicted Of
violating the city law against exces-
sive cab fares, be sentenced to pay a
fine that would take away his horse
and cab and then leave him a bank
rupt many times over, unable to pay
anything but the least proportion of
his debts to his other creditors?
%s*
That under such circumstances the
punishment would have been the max
imum punishment does not seem pos
sible, for the maximum sentence, put
into execution against the defendant
before the court, would wipe out many
times and for the first offense all the
property of the defendant.
The interstate commerce act, i'm
portant as that law is, is not the only
law under which we live.
Can an American judge, without
abuse of judicial discretion, condemn
any one who has not had his day in
court?
Is this case another case, simply
because, instead of being an individ.
ual, the defendant is a corporation,
and instead of being UP for sentence
under a city ordinance that was in
tended not to destroy, but to regulate.
the defendant was UP for sentence
under a national law that was intend
ed, not to destroy, but to promote?
Can a court, without abuse of judi
cial discretion, wipe out all the prop
erty of the defendant before the court
and all the assets to which it's credit
ors look, in an effort to reach and
punish a party that is not before the
court a party that has not been con
yicted, has not been tried, has moi
been indicted even?
~ 4 &
The measure adopted by the tria
court was wholly arbitrary. 1t has nj
basis in any intention or fixed rule
~discoverable in the statute. And n
other way of measuring the number o
%offenses seem to have been given
thought either by the government o.
the trial court.
Passing over the fact that no wore
of evidence or other information SUP
porting the trial courts comment
to be found in the record, would tn
comment, If duly proven, justify
sentence such as this one that other
wise would not have been imposed?
The cases cited by the government
such as those requiring liquor sellers
at their peril, to know whether tn
person to whom a drink is sold is
minor, or within the prohibitions @
the act or not, are not controlling, no
very persuasive.
Indeed, the sentence was o in
posed OF the basis of the facts jus
stated, respecting the defendant be
fore the court, but was imposed who
ly because of other facts, wholly on
side the record, is disclosed by tn
reasons set out in connection with tn
sentence.
The interstate commerce act wa
intended to promote, not to restrain
trade and commerce-to secure fai
dealing in commerce through unifol
nifty, not to put distractions in tn
way of commerce.
The beginning Of commerce is col
stitutional government and the foul
dation of constitutional government
the faith that every guaranty Of OF
, Institutions no matter what the nro,