Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-08-21
Presents Strong Petition For
Another Hearing Before
Court of Appeals
Elk'Ns ACT is AZ STAKE
Government Agrees That If Decision 10
Allowed to Stand Prosecution Of Re-
bate Cases Will Be Impossible in
Future - Argues That High Court
Erred on Several Essential Points.

Chicago, Aug. 21.-The governments
petition for a rehearing by the United
States court of appeals, of the case
against the Standard Oil Company Of
Indiana, was filed today and represents,
it is authoritatively stated, the admin
istration's attempt to save the Elkins
act, and the Interstate commerce law
from becoming futile.
The filing of the petition marked the
appearance Of Attorney General Bona
parte In the case. Altho it is not
specifically stated in the petition, it
was agreed by counsel for the govern
ment following the reversal by the ap-
pellate court of Judge Landis decis-
ion in which $29,24O,OOO fine was
imposed, that If the Interpretation of
the law as given by Judges Grosscup.
Seaman and Baker, was allowed to
stand, q successful prosecution OF re-
bate cases against corporations would
be impossible in the future. The PEE.
tion in part follows:
The Governments Contention.
The Indictment in the case was for a
violation of the Elkins act of February
10, 1908, making it crime to accept
a concession whereby any property is
transported in interstate commerce at
less than the published and filed rate.
1t was proved at the trial that the
Chicago & Alton Railway Company
transported to East ST. Louis, Illinois,
and st. Louis, Missouri, 1892 carloads
of oil.
In all the dealings between shipper
and carrier each carload was treated
as a distinct transaction and handled
as distinct piece Of business.
TIE published and filed rates on this
business were eighteen cents per one
hundred pounds to East st. Louis and
nineteen and a half cents to ST Lou
is. The Standard Oil ComTan actual
ly settled on the basis Of six cents to
East st. Louis and seven and a half
cents to st. Louis. These facts were
admitted.
Oil company's Claims.
The Standard Oil Company inter-
posed the claim in defense that the Ell
kins act was unconstitut 1al; that
the tariffs had not been posted in two
public places at the stations, and in
terposed many technical defenses.
On but a single point involved in the
trial up to the return Of the verdict
of guilty are the rulings of the trial
judge criticized by the court of ap-
peals. In all other particulars his rul-
ings are sustained.
The point on which the trial judge
is reversed by the court Of appeals re-
lates to his rulings on evidence and
his charge to the jury with reference
to ignorance on the part of the Stand
ard Oil Company Of the lawful rate as
a defense.
The court Of appeals in its opinion
has not correctly stated how the judge
ruled on this subject.
1t is said in thy opinion that he re-
fused to admit evidence to the effect
that the Standard Oil Company did
not know what the lawful rate was.
The fact is, and the record so shows,
that all evidence tending to show ig-
norance on the part of the Standard
Oil Company was admitted for the
consideration Of the jury.
Where Judges Disagreed.
The trial judge ruled that Ignorance
on the part Of shipper of what the
lawful rate was could be interposed
as a defense, but that it would not
constitute a defense if it appeared that
the ignorance was the result Of ne
glect on the part of the shipper or of
Wilful failure on the part of the ship
per to resort to the sources Of inform
alton which were available.
The government contends that this
is the correct construction Of the
statute on this subject. The court Of
appeal lays down the rule that it
is necessary for the government to
show beyond reasonable doubt, as
a part of it's case that the shipper
actually knew what the lawful pub
lished and filed rate was.
The government contends that this
is an impossible rule; that it is con-
trary to the purpose of the Elkins act;
that it is contrary to the general
rule applicable in criminal cases; that
put into effect it would make Of the
interstate commerce act "a mere will
statute, destitute of strength or SUBJ
Misstated the Records.
The government contends in the Pc
tition that the court Of appeals has
misstated not only the record as to
what evidence was admitted, but has
also misstated the construction which
the trial judge placed upon the stat
ute, and that for this reason there
should be thorough reargument upon
the only proposition as to which the
ruling of the trial judge up to the
verdict of guilty, is reversed.
The government contends that an
examination of the record will show
that the court did not rule out the
testimony tending to show want of
but that on the contrary
all proper evidence tending to show
that the defendant was ignorant of the