New-York tribune., 1909-10-28
APPEAL SUGAR SUIT
TO SUPREME COURT.
Wiehersham Thinks Statute OF
Limitations Not Applicable.
lFrom The Tribune Bureau.


Washington. Oct gT--The Supreme Court
OF the United States will be asked to de-
eide whether Gustav T.. Kissel and Thomas
r Harmed. who were among those indicted
with the American Sugar Refining COM
pany for criminal conspiracy under the
Sherman antitrust law, will escape under
the provisions Of the statute Of limitations
as decided by Judge Holt, of the United
states Court, In New York, yesterday. Al
torney General Wickersham announced to-
day that the government would at once ap-
peal from the decision to the Supreme
Court under the act of March 2, 1907. which
authorizes such an appeal.
Mr. Wickersham. in a statement made
public this afternoon, gives his opinion OF
the decision and expresses his belief that
the statute OF limitations does not prohibit
further prosecution of the two men IN ques-
ton. After reciting his reasons for this
belief he declares himself further strength
ened I'm his determination to press the case
by the farreaching consequences OF Judge
Holt's decision, and the fact that lit IS con-
trary TO the views expressed by other
judges at circuit. az well as those enter
tained by the Department of Justice
The Attorney General refers to Judge
Holts pointing out that the decisions ia
the different judicial districts of the United
states with respect to the application of the
statute of limitations were at variance and
that it was impossible to harmonize them.
Judge Holt concurred with those cases
which held that the statute of limitations
began to run after the first overt act In
pursuance Of the same conspiracy. In the
Sherman antitrust law. according to the
courts. Conspiracy has the same mean
LT,TN
applied to a conspiracy In restraint of trade
the same law of limitations which is ap-
picable to a contract in restraint of trade.
That Is, as the Attorney General expressed
it. the Court held that the offence was
complete and the statute OF limitations be-
gan to run the moment the contract was
signed or the conspirators were agreed in
their design.
THE Department Of Justice, on the other
hand" the Attorney General says, has
always entertained the view that Congress
employed the different words advisedly
and that contract in restraint of trade
is not the same thing as a conspiracy in
restraint of trade. Where the law enacts
that every person who engages in a con-
spiracy to restrain trade is guilty Of
misdemeanor It means that so long as
the conspiTators are continuing in a course
of conduct which restraints Interstate trade
or commerce they are violating the act.
Where the restraint of trade may be ter
minated by their voluntary act, and not
otherwise, the statute of limitations does
not begin to run in their favor until they
perform the act which terminates the re-
straint and allows the current of trade
which they had interrupted to resume its
course.
Judge Holts structures against the in
creasing tendency of public prosecutors to
indict for conspiracy when crimes have
been committed is not understood as ap-
plicabIe to this prosecution IN view OF the
fact that the only crime of which the de-
PENDANTS in this case could be accused was
that created by the anti,trust act. namely,
of engaging in a conspiracy in restraint of
trade or commerce among the several
states
The statement has been received in
Washington with great satisfaction, and
those familiar with the provisions of the
Sherman law believe that AIR. Wickersham
has made point which cannot fail to
have an important bearing on the further
adjudication of the case.