The Morning examiner. [volume] (Ogden, Utah) 1904-1910, 1909-03-14
STANDARD OIL CASE.

The conviction and phenominal flne
was set aside says the San Francisco
Chronicle. did not satisfy the sense of
justice in the public mind Testimony
in favor of the defendant was excluded
on technical grounds. to the benefit OF
which the defendant was entitled by
every consideration of equity and even
decency. Intent is of the essence Of
crime, and when the vilest OF criml-
nails offer testimony tending TO prove
his absolute innocence. regard for JUS
tice requires that the testimony be ad-
mitted, to be believed or disbelieyed.
according to the judgment OF the jury.
There were other features of the orig
inal trial which shocked public sentl-
ment, not the least of which was the
grossly unjudicial attitude of the trial
judge. Some of the utteraDces of Judge
Lands were worse than unjudlcial-
they were demagogic.
The result OF the second trial and
the attitude of Judge Anderson are no
more satisfactory than the outcome OF
Anderson has indicated that from the
first he was determined to throw the
case out of court Perhaps it ought
to have been thrown out, but If so IL
was better for all interests involved
that such end be reached by what was
evidently a calm and deliberate judi
cial process, The verdict of the coun-
try Will be that both Judge Landis
and Judge Anderson are temperament
tally unfit for the bench and that error
wac committed In appointing them.
They are doubtless both oil them per-
fectly honest.
The facts in this case are that there
were three routes by which the Stand
ard OIL company could ship oil to ST.
Louis from the point of origin invol
we'd in this case. TWO of these routes
had open published rates of cents n
hundred. The Alton rate on file with
the interstate commerce commission
was IS cents The Standard Oil COM
pany shipped by all routes and paid
6 cents by all routes, and upon the
first trial offered TO prove that Its
traffic manager supposed the Alton
published rate TO be the same as that
OF the othe rrouteS-6 cents. This
evidence was refused on the ground
that it was the business OF the shipper
to absolutely know what rates were on
file with the commission, and that IL
he shipped in error, but in good faith,
he was just as guilty as though he
had intended to commit crimo-an
atrocious doctrine, which the higher
courts made short work of, All the
generally known facts in the case IN.
dicate that even If there were techni'
cal violation OF the law In default OF
conclusive evidence of intent to COM
nit crime, the fine should have been
nominal and not spectacular.
Now, there is a demagogic clamor
for the punishment of Standard Oil
because 1t is rich and on general prin
ciples. Such influences an honest
court Will sturdlly resist, regardless OF
any personal consequences TO himself;
but when 4 judge goes wholly out Of
his way TO acQuit defendant by de-
claIing unlawful that which courts in
numberleSS cases have treated as law.
full and which. If not doubtful, ought
To be so. he does wrong He should
have admitted the classification sheet.
and II the verdict was guilty. let the
legal point be raised where, Ii not
sustained. the course of justice would
not be blocked A rate on any given
commodity can be as clearly stated in
a classification sheet as by a special
commodity rate 1t Is the method in
common use since railroads have been
operated. 1t Is the only satisfactory
way OF conducting the business and it
will stand. OF the two trials and tho
two judges one is as unsatisfactory as
the other.