The state herald., 1908-08-28
ATTORNEY GENERAL BoNAPARTE
PETITIONS COURT OF AP-
PEALS FOR REHEARiNG.
UPHOLDS LANDIS' FINE
ALLEGES THAT JUDGE GROSS
CUPS DECISION ERRs AS TO
STATUTES AND EVIDENCE.

Chlcago.-lne government potiti'h
for rehearing by the United states
Court of Appeals of the case against
the Standard Oil Company of Indiana
was filed Friday and represents, 1t Is
stated, the administration attempt 10
save the Elkin's act and the Interstate
Commerce law from becoming futile.
The filing of the petition marked
the appearance of Attorney Generai
Bonaparte in the case, as well as that
of Frank b. Kellogg, who Is special
assistant to the attorney general. Be
sides these two names the petition is
signed by Edwin w. Sims, UnitSu
States district attorney at Chicago, and
Special Assistant James II. Wilkerson,
both of whom presented the govern
ments side of the case in the original
hearing before Judge Lands, who ad-
ministered the famous fine of S29,24O,-
600 against the defendant.
MAY concern, which through cor
porate organization and railroad IA
yoritism has established gigantic
monopoly in territory with popula'
tion of millions and concentrated a
business many thousand times as large
as that carried on by the ordinary cit-
zen, plead in mitigation OF punishment
when called TO account for its viola
tlons of the law, that the number ot
offenses which 1t has committed and
for which 1t is required to answer
has been in proportion to the magni-
tude of its business"
This Is the question which Attorney
General Bonoparte and associate coun'
sci put squarely to the United States
Circuit Court of Appeals in their petit
tion for rehearing of the case against
the Standard oil Company of Indiana.
''Is this court to be understood" the
petition asks. "as announcing the rule
that in case 1t does not agree with the
trial judge as to the amount of pun
ishment which should have been i'm
posed, the sentence will be reversed
on the ground that 1t was an abuse Of
judicial discretion?
Every day defendants are fined
many times more than the value OF all
the property they possess.
rs the principle different because
the amount involved is measured by
hundreds of dollars in one case and by
millions in the other?"
The profits OF the oil company. $685.
$50 POS In four years, are cited as am
ply justifying Judge Lands In doing
precisely what he did. The petition
says:
THE trial Judge did that which is-
done In every criminal case. He sought
to inform himself as to who the de
fendant was; as to whether the crime
committed embraced more OF wicked
ness than the Indictment charged: or
whether on the other hand, there were
circumstances OF mitigation"
The petition asks:
"May a shipper successfully plead
ignorance OF the lawful rate. when that
ignorance is the result OF his own neg
ligence or OF his failure TO avail him
self OF the sources of knowledge at
his commando"
To permit such defense. the petition
says, 'is to make Of the law Il mere
willo'the-wisp Of legislation, n phan.
tom statute destitute Of strength or
substance"
In conclusion. tho government di.
rocts attention to the following con.
tentions:
THAT the opinion Of this court is
based upon Il misconceBtion Of the
record with reference to the rulings
OF the trial judge as to the admission
OF evidence tending to show want OF
knowledge and with reference to his
construction Of the statute on tAat
subject. and the theory on which the
case was tried.
That the Interpretation OF the stat
ute by this court. Imposing no duty on
the shipper and permitting a defense
OF ignorance TO be made without regard
TO the negligence OF the shipper. is
contrary 10 the language Of the statute
and to Its purpose and seriously i'm.
pairs the efficiency Of the act.
That the criticism OF the trial Judge
for abuse OF discretion rests upon
wrong assumption Of what the trial
Judge actually did and assumes that
he attempted TO try and punish tho
STANDARD on Company Of New Jersey.
That the ruling stated in the opin.
ion TO the effect that n fine IL cxces.
slyo when Il exceeds In amount IN.
ability Of the defendant 20 lay Ia nm
innovation In criminal law.
That. In short the opinion ms Il
stands erroneounly states material
portions of the record: does Injustice
TO the trial Judge. leaves doubtful In
new trial the rule of law 10 be nm
piled. both M 10 knowledge on The
part OF the shipper, and M to the mum
Der OF offcnHos. appears 10 be- In con.
fliot with the language of the Supreme
Court and with the previous Language
OF the presiding Judge ~ this court.
and with the great weight Of legal au.
thoflty. and, II permitted TO romaiu
unmodiflod. will tend TO encourage dis.
obedience 10 law. TO impede the on.
foreemont ~ ualuiAry atatutaH and
largely to defeat their purpose"