The morning journal-courier., 1908-11-14


 ---------------------------- ----------
 THE STANDARD OIL MiXUr.
 Some weeks ago the Bar Assoela- ton of America enthusiastically put it. self on record as opposed to the many fragrant abuses of our courts and the many ways in which unwelcome mis- carriages of justice are brought about. The Bar association has had the hear ty endorsement of President-elect Taft in this matter and there are not few who believe that the most valuable and lasting work to he done by him as the White House executive will be in bringing about these much-needed re- forms in our courts.
 One of the chief contentious of the Bap'association is that wherever there is an appeal, the high court, to which the case Is carried, should render it's decision upon the merits of the legal contention as whole rather than upon certain of It's teehnicalities, as it has been the erroneous custom to do heretofore. It will mean a long step forward in the development of Ameri- can jurisprudence if such change is brought about. As matters are now constituted, there have been more fragrant miscarriages of justice because of intricate technicalltlcs, which are brought in by scheming lawyers to cloud the main issues, than the poor. unsuspecting but long-suffering public realizes. The present Standard oil case mixup is an example of this sort of thing.
 When the twenty-niue- million dollar fine, the biggest ever,' was rendered against the Standard oil, the public had to catch its breath But there were certain clements of unfalrness in the litigation which led up to that de- cision-elcment of unfairncss which this paper along with others, was fore ed to admit. certain highly import ant evidence, for example. had been arbitrarily refused admittance by the court Again, the basis for "counts" in reckoning up the fine was not at all a satisfactory one. The oil com pany was quite as much entitled tc justice upon these minor matters as the most uninhuential defendant without any financial backing, On the oth- CT hand the latter sort of defendant ought to be able to obtain as strict justice as the oil company in another suit
 What was the result? The case was appealed on the basis of several of these minor points. Ever since then there has been such an intricate tanglc of justice that at no time has it beer conclusively shown that the govern. ment or the corporation were in tn, right in the contention as whole. Tho big fine has been nlllincd by highel court, and the governments appca from this latter decision has been re fused, but the real issues have been ef fectually buried in the general wrangl, between the courts, the quarrel be tween the appellate court and the cx ecutivc department of the government Fair-mnded, unprejudiccd citizen have today little clearer conceptions Q the right or wrong of tho controvers, than ever they had.
 It Is not some mighty fine whlCl should be desired, Every one mus realize that, if such fine is fnall, imposed and is ever paid, tho none will come out of the pockets of tn American people with a general ad vance in the price of oil As the Ney York Press had put 1t; "Somethln over which the American public can re joice with unrestralned enthusiasm that it will not have to pay that twen ty-nine-million dollar fine in the forr of increased prices of Standard oil pro ducts to take mp the fine, This appear to be the only case on record wher the public came off anything to th good in Standard oil transaction
 What Is desired is strict justice be tween straightforward goyernmen and a corporation, quite aside from tn latters generally accepted reputato for underhand methods, deserved or no as they may be. TO that end it ma be hoped that the matter will not ! allowed to remain in It's present unsat isfactory status and that the final ste of tho government in application the Supreme court for leave to appea will be granted The case is an i'm portant one and a suitable one to |