The Tacoma times. [volume] (Tacoma, Wash.) 1903-1949, 1909-02-23
|O|L TRUST ON.
TRIAL AGAIN
F A M o U s $29, 900, 900
FINE CASE IS RE-
OPENED IN CHICA-
GO COURT.
(By United Press Leased Wire.)


CHICAGO, Feb. 23.-The Sec
Ond great struggle between the
Standard Oil company and the
United States government began
in the United States district court
here today when examination of
veniremen for the selection Of
jury to retry the famous $780,
OOO, 900 case began.
The names of $50 residents of
Northern Illinois were selected
last week to comprise the panel
from which the jury will be
chosen.
United States District Attorney
Sims, assisted by Special Prosecu-
tor James Wilkerson and Assist
ant District Attorney Harry Par
kin, represented the government,
and Attorneys John 8. Miller.
Moritz Rosenthal and A. d. Eddy,
the oil trust.
Motion to Quash.
Immediately after the court
convened Attorney Miller, chief
counsel for the Standard, moved
that the entire venire of $50
names be quashed on the ground
that it was improperly drawn, and
that too large a proportion of the
talesmen was made up of farm
ers.
Attorneys for each side then
began an argument on the motion
to excuse the veniremen. The
court excused the veniremen until
this afternoon, pending decis-
ion on the motion.
Many Charges.
That the government will again
attempt to have an enormous fine
assessed became known last week
when Sims notified the attorneys
for the defendant company that
he expected to prove 1852 separ-
ate offenses of rebating In VIOLA
tion of the Elkins antitrust law.
II he succeeds he will ask that
the court assess the maximum
penalty of $10,000,000. The min
imum penalty, If the company
should be convicted on all these
counts, will be only 100000.
Famous Case.
The original Standard Oil case
was heard by Federal Judge|
Kenesaw M. Lands and the trial
began March 4, 1907. The oil
company had been indicted by two
separate grand juries on 6428l
counts, charging violations of the
Elkins antitrust law which prof.
hibits the granting or acceptingI
of rebates on oil or oil products. |
After a trial replete with sensa-
tions, the jury returned a verdict
of guilty on each indictment and
on each separate count in each in-l
dictment. The fine assessed wasI
$29,240,000, which was thei
maximum.
The Standard Immediately took
the case to the United States|
court Of appeals on writ of er-l
ror.
Judgment Reversed.
Last June the appellate court
handed down a decision on thfsl
writ of error petition reversingl
the trial and remanding the case
to Judge Landis' court for re-trial.
This opinion, written by JudgeI
Grosscup, contained what was
called the most remarkable exco-
ration of one court by another in
the history of the American
bench. The opinion denounced
Judge Landis in unmeasured
terms.
The appellate court declined tol
reverse this decision, and Attor-
|ney General Bonaparte then ap-|
piled to the supreme court of thel
United States for a writ of certi-
orari, hoping thus to get theI
case before the nations highest
tribunal with the $29,240,000I
fine attached.
Re-Trial Ordered.
The supreme court refused tol
grant the writ on the ground that
no great question of public mo-
ment was involved. Attorney Gen.
eral Bonaparte Immediately or
dered United States District Attor-
ney Sims to begin the re-trial at
the earliest possible moment.
Judge Landis, who presided att
the former trial, declined to do so
at the second, and Judge Ander-
son, of indianapolis, consented to|
act.
VOTING EOR pOGTNF A STER