The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-07-23
OIL CASE
contiruea frem Pase one.

the plaintiff in error during the period covered by the transaction. offered to testify that during that period he did not know anything about an eighteen cent rate over the Alton Railroad; that his intention had never been called to any such rate by any person or by the examination of any document; and that it was his understanding and belief besed on what he was told by one Hol- lands. tariff clerk of the Alton Rail- road that he rate over the Alton road was six cents and that such rates had been filed with he interstate commerce commission.
 Hollands. who was called by he government. had previously testified that he had no recollection of telling Bogardus that the six cent rate Ca comodlty rate) had been filed with the interstate commerce commission. But answering on his voir dire, the jury being excused. Hollands further stated that he regarded six cents per hundred pounds as the oil rate between Whit ing and East St. Louis: that he regard : ed a certain application sheet, which covered Whiting at Chicago rates. and the sheet for Chicago taken together as showing a six cent commodity rate: that whenever he spoke of the rate on this commodity between Whiting and East St. Louis. he had in mind those papers and that if he had been asked by Borgardus or anybody else whether there was a rate between Whiting and East St. Louis he would have answered that there was and that 1t was filed and that such rate was six cents: which ev- idence thus preferred was excluded by the court for the sole reason that as a matter of fact, AS. the court (not the jury) found the fact to be the appli- cation sheets containing the six cents commodity rate had not been filed with the interestate commerce commission.
 LawfuI Pnbiished Rate.
 Had the court found as fact that the sheet had been so filed or submit ting that question to tho jury. had the jury found that that sheet had been So filed, the six cent rate given toBorsar- due admitted they woud have been the lawful published rate
 The court relates that Gorgardus was offered as a witness to prove that tariff describing rate of six and one quarter cents from Whiting to East St Louis was issued by the Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railroad Company. a competing line. October s..1go5 and filed with the interstate commerce commis- sion two days later. that such tariff sheet was among the tariH files in possession of the plaintiff in error. and that the latter during the period named shipped there 8 large number of cars of petroleum and products at sail rate and that the rate was equivalent to the shipper of the rate of six cents over the Alton road. owing to quarter ot a cent terminal charge. all of which evidence was excluded. as was also the offer of the tariff sheet itself, pro- duced from the files of the interstate comerce commission, and an amend ment thereto filed in April 1903.
 The opinion here quotes Judge Lan- dfs's charge to the jury in which the district judge declared that to show that the defendant accepted conces- sion Knowing it was not necessary to establish that the defendant had ac- tualIy knowledge of the lawful rate.
 On this phase of the case the opinion of the court of appeals declares:
 Tn this interpretation of the inter state commerce law, so far as 1t relates to shippers, we cannot concur. The cases cited by the government. such as those requiring liquor sellers at their peril to know whether the person to whom drink is sold is minor within the prohibition of the act or not. are not controlling nor very persuasive, The Interstate Commerce act was in- tended to promote, not to restrain trade and commerce to secure fair dealings in commerce through uni formity. not to put obstructions in the way of commerce. Surely the farmer