The sun., 1908-08-24

Th0 AttOrney-1eneEdl, tuo DoUiSV
Attorney and the special counsel en-
gagged in the prosecution Of the Standard
Oil case at Chicago have presented to the
United States Circuit Court Of Appeals
q petition for a rehearing upon the de-
cision Of that tribunal reversing the
Judgment in which the District Court,
Judge KENEsAw M. LAND1s presiding.
imposed the fine Of $2e, 900 upon the
defendant.
The language Of the petition goes to
the very verge Of professional propriety.
II accuses the appellate court Of having
done injustice to the trial Judge and de-
clares that it's opinion II permitted to
remain unmodifed will tend to enoour-
age disobedience to law, to impede the
enforcement Of salutaryy statutes and
largely to defeat their purpose.
We do not know what particular rules
may be prescribed in regard to such ap-
plications by the United States Circuit
Court Of Appeals in Chicago. Generally,
however. throughout the country mo-
tions for reargument are founded upon
one or more Of these propositions: W
That the Court has Inexperienced the
facts as disclosed in the record; az that
the Court has overlooked some material
statutory enactment bearing upon the
questions involved, or (S that the Court
has overlooked some decision Of con-
trolling authority. We venture to say
that there Is no rule anywhere which con-
templates an application for a rehearing
on the ground that the view expressed
by the Appellate Court In its opinion is
unjust and will have bad effect on the
community, yet such to very consid-
cradle extent Is the basis Of this motion
in the Standard Oil case. The language
used by the representatives Of the Gov
ernment Is equivalent to an accusation
Of carelessness and incompetency in the
preparation Of the opinion of the Circuit
Court Of Appeals leading to injustice, and
therefore calculated to bring the law
into contempt.
Perhaps it is not to be wondered at
that General BoNAPARTE and
his associates have indulged themselves
20 this extent when we consider the free
dom with which the President has Off
cially condemned the Federal courts
when their action has not suited his ideas
In the construction and application Of
the law. AS we are likely soon to have
m excellent lawyer for President in the
person of WILLIAM H. TAFT it would
seem that the time has come for little
more mildness of expression in reference
to judicial matters. Nothing is gained
in the long run by exaggeration or by
unjustly attributing unworthy motives
to public officials whether executive,
administrative or judicial. The appel
late courts themselves are not altogether
free from liability to criticism in this
respect. Occasionally, although not
very often, they use language in revers-
ing judgments which is unnecessarily
severe and would be far more effective
IL it were toned down and some of the
adjectives were eliminated. Some per-
sons think that it would have been better
II fudge GRosscUP had dealt more mildly
with the decision of Judge lands, but
however that may be the language Of
the Attorney-General on this application
for a rehearing in the Standard Oil case
is evidence OF remarkable and most
lamontable change in the attitude of the
bar toward the courts.
No set of facts ought to be possible
which renders it just or proper for coun-
sci to address such language to a court.
If the facts do warrant it then the court
as now constituted ought to cease to
exist.
H. N nlA