The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-07-23
United States Circuit Court of Appeals RGVGrSeS the Decision
 of Judge Landis
PROPOSES
 TO CONTINUE THE FIGHT
Prosecution Has Thirty Days in Which To File Petition for Rehearine and if Denied Case Will Be
 Taken Up Elsewhere.

Chicago. July 22.-Aithough the United States circuit court of appeals today re- versed and remanded the case of the government against the Standard Oil company of Indiana in which Judge Lan- dis in the district court had imposed fine of s29,24O.OOO the government forces will continue the legal battle
 The government has 90 days within |, which to file petition for rehearing. and it will be filed within the allotted period. In lns opinion which was con- cured in by Judges Seaman and Baker, . denling with the Intent" feature of the case-a vital point-Judge Grosscup says:
 We should take up tbese subjects in the order stated. the first being whether shipper ean without error be convicted of accepting concession from the law fal published rate even though 1t is not shown as bearing on the matter of intent, that the shipper at the time of accepting such concession knew what the lawful published rate was-a view of the law that IS embodied in the charge. and car ried out m the ruling. excluding certain proffcred testimony. including that of one Edward Bogardus. who, being in abso- luto charge of traffic affairs of plaintiff. in error offered to testify that during that pcIiod he did not know anything about an 15-oent rate over the Alton ~ail- road; that hls attention had never been called to any such rate by any person or by examInation of any document, and that it was his understanding and bellef | based on what he was told by one Hoi- | land tariff clerk of the Alton railroad, l that the late over the Alton road was
 csnts, aio that such rate had been filed
 with the interstate commerce eomtnis-
 sion"
 Minimum Fine.
 Judge Grosscup's opinion leaves littlo of
 the contention that each carload at the 6-cent rate constituted separate of- fense. Even the the shipments, of which | there were about 800, could not be so con- | sidered, under the ruling of the court. The fine should have been based on settle ments between the railroad and the .il | company. Of these there were just 35. | The maximum fine this basis would amount to but s720,0O0, and the minimum s36,0 000
 | In the event a 'rehearing is denied the i government may go to trial on the orig nal indictment. containing 1462 counts; an action which District Attorney Sims could be ready to take within two weeks, i or upon any one of seven other indict- ments containing 4422 counts. As vast amount of work has been done on the
 case just decided, it is unlikely that an entirely new case will be instituted. The record of the present case contains over 100000 words, and is estimated to have cost the government $20O.0oo.
 Another Move Made. | Another move which may be made by the federal authorities is to transfer tine l prosecution from this jurisdiction either to the Western New York district or the ! Eastern Tennessee district In these two 1 districts the government investigation led ] to indictments containing about 20e0 l counts against the Standard oil company
 That portion of the decision epitomiz- | ing the attitude of the court was as fol- 1 lows:
 Counsel for the government say in l concluding their brief that the Elkins act passed because the peace of so- ciety and the welfare of the people de- manded it; that railroad inequality neans 1 business ruin to all except those powerful enough to make them selves the beneficiaries of the dis criminations; means the wiping out of an. industry of a town, of city, at the command of officers of private cor 'poration; that railroad inequality is the basis of monopoly and the wrongful con- ception of wealth; that no law of more vital importance was ever passed by Congress, and that those guilty of violat- ing it are guilty of a serious crime against the principles of industrial free ; dom and equality.
 Every sentence of this arraignment is true. That this court recognizes the im- portance of the enforcement of that act ! is shown in its 'affirmance of penalties that under other circumstances would ne regarded sas.rVery severe. But the inter- state commerce 6ct, important as that law is is not the only law under which we live.
 Guaranty of Law.
 We live under a guaranty that reaches back to the beginning of our law, and is securely planted in every constitution of civilized government. that no one shall De punished until he has been heard, and above this fundamental guaranty there can be set no higher prerogative; for let it once come to pass that under the stress of enforcing equality, any power in the government may override the fundameu- tai rights of being judged only after hav- ing been duly tred-a right just as es- sential Tn the associated relation of the corporation as to men in the relationship of county partners or to men ndivid- ually-there will remain commerces worth the name to safeguard. The beginning of commerce is constitutional government and the foundation of constitutional gov ernment is the faith that every guaranty of our institutions, no matter what the provocation will be sacredly observed
 The court room was crowded with law yers and newspaper men. when Judge Grosscup, accompanied by Judges Baker and Seaman took their seats Judge Grosscup did not read the document. merely referring to it by number, and stating that the case had been reversed and remanded. There was jubiation