The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-01-18
TRUST is FINED.
Judge Dana Assesses Sl2,sOO
Against Harvester Combine.
Found Guilty of Violating the
Law on AZ Counts.
DENIES A NEW TRIAL.
Thinks the Admission OF Evil
dence Was Fair.
Maximum Fine Might Have Been
$1,000 Oh Each Count.
DENIES A NEW TRIAL

Judge Dana of the district cart
this morning overruled motion Tor
new trial in the case of the state o.
Kansas against the International Har-
vester company of America and as
sessed a fine of $4,000 and the costs
of the action. The case was heard on
the second of December and the jury
returned a verdict finding the trust
guilty on AZ counts. the Information
charging a violation of the trust laws
of the state.
The original information charged 10
sales, each sale constituting a count
but 33 of these were eliminated on ac-
count of an error in the information
which failed to state that the sales
were made by Seery & Morton and
only mentioned the name of the latter
member of the firm. The case was
brought by c. C. Coleman when ne
was attorney general of the state put
was permitted to drag along ana Is
one of the cases that Attorney General
Fred S. Jackson fell heir to When hS
succeeded Mr.. Coleman.
The suit was hotly contested by the
attorneys for the harvester case, YER
million, Stanley and Evans of Wlchlta,
and J. G.. Slonecker of Topeka; Major
a. NJ. Harvey of Topeka being retain
ed by the state to assist in the prosecu-
ton. The minimum fine is one hun
dred dollars on each count with max
imum fine of $1,000 on each count, So
that the fine might have been either
$4,000 or $4,000 if either the mini
mum or maximum fine had been as
sessed.
Judge Dana took an intermediate
ground in view of the fact that While
the evidence proved clearly the ex-
istence of a trust that it showed equal
ly clearly that the price of farm ma
chinery has not been advanced since
the formation of the trust. In his de-
cision Judge Dana referred to the fines
assessed by Judge Lands in the Stand
ard Oil case and the fine more recent
ly assessed against the Santa Fe Rail-
road company in California.
Company Given a Stay.
The Harvester company was given
a stay of execution for so days I'M
til they can prepare their case for the
supreme court and the amount of the
bond left for the attorneys in the
case to agree upon. The fine assessed
this morning is probably the largest
ever assessed in the state where there
is a chance of collecting it. During
the early days of the prohibitary law
in the state a fine amounting to some
thing like $4,000 was assessed against
a violator of the law but no effort
was ever made to collect it.
The conviction secured in the case
sion of evidence OF a statement made
by Cyrus Mccormick at a meeting of
implement dealers in Kansas City
shortly after the formation of the
trust and told of its intents and pur-
poses and ghost like this talk arose
and in the form of testimony was pre-
scented to the jury which found the
company guilty.
For this reason there can be no
plea that subordinates are to blame
for violations of the trust laws, the
statement having been made by the
president of the combined companies.
The case in which the fine was as
sessed this morning is the first crimi-
nal action ever brought against a
trust in the case where damages have
been assessed.
In assessing the fine Judge Dana
said: I'm the arguments for a new
trial in the International Harvester
company case it has been said that the
evidence of a witness as to what
Cyrus Mccormick, president of the
company said at a meeting of imple-
ment dealers was incompetent, and
should have been excluded from the
jury.
This point was pressed with great
ability and zeal but after having given
tbs case great deal of attention I
am of the same opinion 1 was when
1 admitted the evidence to the jury.
The testimony was most important. 1t
appears that Mr.. Mccormick who was
one of the officers of the company,
the president. had been asked by the
members of the Implement Dealers
association to explain the methods
and workings of the company before
they signed contracts for the next
year.
I'm this speech he made statements
that were of great Importance in dis
closing the character. business and
methods of the defendants. Under or
binary circumstances this testimony
would be incompetent but in this case
I am of the opinion that the Informal
ton charged a conspiracy between the
companies and all the officers of these
companies.
Answers the Objections.
Under this condition it was the de-
cIaration of one of the parties charged
with the offense and concerned the bus
mess of the corporation and 1 believe
that for this reason the testimony is
competent. Another point suggested by
the attorneys for the defendant COM
panies and urged with great ability is
that but one charge was included or
charged in the information and that it
was continuation of the offense in
stead of a separate offense every time
that a sale was made.
while not free from doubt in nv
opinion this point is untentable but in
my opinion to declare this a continu-
ing offense punishable with but one
sentence of a maximum fine of 1000
would be a traversty in the prosecu-
ton of offenders charged with break
ing the laws of the state The law in
the case which governed the trial of
the Standard Oil case before Judge
Landis and in the case against the
Santa Fe tried at Los Angeles is very
similar to our law. 1t was there held
that separate violations constituted
separate offenses and again by our own
prohibitory law analogous provisions
have so been construed to mean sep
arate offenses.
'The court is of the opinion that