Los Angeles herald., 1909-01-05
AGAIN
ESCAPES FINES
SUPREME COURT DECIDES IN
FAVOR OF STANDARD
Decision Definitely Frees Oil Company
from Necessity of Paying $29, 24o,=
600 Penalty imposed by
Judge Lands

WASHINGTON, Jan. 4.-The $29, 24O,-
coo fine case of the Standard Oil COM
pany will not be reviewed by the SUI
preme court Of the United States.
The decision Of the court to this eff
feet was announced by Chief Justice
Fuller soon after the court convened
today.
The case came to the court on a
petition filed by the government ask
ing the court for writ of
certorari to order up the record in
the case for a review of the decision
Of the federal court of appeals for the
Seventh circuit, by which Judge Lam
of $29,240000 against the Standard Oil
company for accepting rebates from
the railroads was reversed.
In the supreme court the case turned
largely upon the right of the court to
interfere in view of the fact that the
case has been passed upon by the court
Of appeals, the government contending
for such privilege as a right, while it
was urged in behalf of the oil company
that the presidents were all against
such a proceeding.
The action of the court consisted in
the announcement that the govern
ment's petition would not be granted.
The effect of this announcement will
be to leave standing the decision of the
court of appeals, which was adverse to
the government and favorable to the
company.
No Reasons Given
The courts announcement was the
barest formality. No reasons whatever
We're given and the determination of
the court was stated along with a num-
Der of cases of comparatively little
Importance. The chief justice simply
announced that the petition for GER
tiorari was denied.
Under this ruling the case will now
go back to Judge Lands court for a
new trial, in accordance with the de-
cision of the court of appeals.
1t is stated at the department of
justice that the decision gives the case
it's original status subject to the views
of Judge Grosscup as contained in his
decisions Of July % and November 10,
1908 These, in effect, were:
First, that the trial court Judge
Landis) had erred in its ruling on the
admission and exclusion of evidence,
and in its charge to the jury, by adopt
ing the view that a shipper can be con-
victed of accepting rebate, even
though it is shown on the matter of
intent that he did not know what the
lawful published rate actually was;
second. that the true tests of the num-
Der of offenses is not the number of
carloads transported but the number of
single transactions resulting in a ship
ment; that the offense of accepting a
concession in the transaction that the
given rate consumed, whereby the
shipper, for the thing shipped, no mat
ter how great or how little its quantity,
gives a rate different from the estab-
iished rates; third, that the trial court
abused it's discretion in imposing an
excessive fine of $29, 240,0 00."
The question as to when the case Will
again be presented to Judge Lands for
trial depends upon the United States
attorney, Sims, for the northern Hi
nois district, but it is expected that
some action toward that end Will be
taken within the next few eWeks.
1t is probable that Judge Lands will
again personally conduct the trial, but
if is entirely within his discretion to
request another judge of the same dis
trict to act.