Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-03-11
.DIDCOOPIR IIHR0N||N| OUT
SHOOIROBIN| Of COURT

Jury Brlnggs. IN Verdict q
Not Guilty by llstrullc- l''|l'lll |; /.
ttOn Of d! Court
Chicago, March 10. The famous
suit rof the federal government
against the Standard OIL company of
Indiana, wherein the defendant COM
pany at one time faced : fine Of $780,
24O, 900, ut the hands Of Judge 2. N.
Lands on 4 charge Of having accept
ed rebates on freight from the Chica-
60 & Alton railroad, " came to- an
abrupt end today. Judge a. B: An
derson Of the u. s. district court, be-
fore whom the case was brought for
retrial after reversal BY the United
States court OF appeals, instructed
the jury to. md verdict Of mot
guilty. II :: ss.s5a .@ @S.ss. , >S t-, -y
Judge Anderson's decision was not
altogether unlocked for when the
case was called today, he having
previously announced to the prose-
5cutorss that the proof relied upon IN
the first trial was incompetent and
1t was with something of an air Of
.hoplessness that District Attorney
Edwin W. Sims and bis assistants at
tempted to show the admisslhility
81 the Illinois classification to prove
the existence OF q legal rate Of 1S
cents, which was q vital point in the
governments contention. a:,s,tg..75;; t:s u,
\; It was after Assistant District AZ
torney James ilkerson had .ar-
xnsd To- txo hour, q !, /. ssinid i. q ln ~, n snd
sd IN i54sd II sdiss' sdpros . iil could
not furnish the proof deemed 1eces-
sary BY the court to secure . verdict
OF guilty. or even a continuation of
the case, that Judge Anderson an
nounced his decision. ..., s... !, .:
Mr.. Wilkerson said the govern
ment could proceed no further and
suggested q dismissal Of the case. AT
this point Attorney John s. Miller
OF counsel for the oil company arose
and moved that. there be- an instruct.
ed verdict Of not guilty. y. ID :s2 !
The court 50 + ordered. and jury.
which had been excluded from the
court room during the arguments by
the attorneys, was called lin and.
charged. ,.Sa n: n 5sg 4
The decision Of Judges Grosscup,
Baker and Seaman, Of the United
States circuit court Of appeals, re
versing Judge Landis, together with
the action of the United States su-
preme court IN refusing to review the
decision Of the court Of appeals. play.
ed an important part In the dispo-
sition Of the case today. 5ss.}ss ~. 2:S .,
Judge Anderson, 4 III 81 announcing
his nnding, quoted from the opinion.
Of the appellate court Judges. The
strongest expression IN favor Of his
view. was the statement in that de-
cision: The Court says that the
question Is one upon which judges,
after full discussion, might very
easily disagree. I. ,s.l:3
Whether prosecution on y several
other q ind dictments still pending
against the oil company win be insti-
tuted. District Attorney Sims would
not express IN opinion. stating the
question rested only with the United
States attorney general.
II It is the opinion of the federal at
torneys that Judge Anderson's rsl-s
Ing win have the effect OF invalidat-a
ing class tariffs, and will make II inn
possible 70 convict q shipper for vio-
lation of class tarin regulations.
Judge Grosscup, who wrote the opin-
Ion ofS the United States circuit court
81 appeals, upon which Judge Ander
son based his action. in taking the
case from the jurry. sai,da
4 The thing Tor the government 70
do a Ia DO away with elassilc ations
ID the regulation os the tarfn rates
md make the railroads flle tariffs
That speedy the rate on each commo-
aHs 80 VI Y. = s.. 49,,