Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1911-11-15
PACKERS IN CLEVER COUP.
Take Criminal Prosecution Direct to
Supreme Court.

\ q
Chicago, Nov. IA further effort Of
the indicted Chicago meat packers to
avoid trial and to have declared uncon-
stitutional, void. and Of no force the
Sherman antitrust law was made yes
terday. The move was a complete s'r-
prise to the government and consisted
8 OF the surrender to the United States
marshal Of the packers and an immed-
late appeal to United States Circuit
i Judye C.. C. Kohlsaat for 4 wri- OF
fabeas corpus. The arguments VII be
heard Thursday.
Violations of the fifth, sixth and
eighth amendments to the United
States constitution. ambiguity and its
alleged failure either to create an Of
Tense against the government or so t..
define what t set up as an offense In
q manner that would enable citizen
to know when he erred and when not.
were charged n gu inst the She man law,
as interpreted by the United States sll-
preme court in the Standard Oil and
tobacco cases.
Attorney John S. Miller, who as chief
of counse! for the packers. conducted
the court move, characterized the Sher-
man law as net large enough to
catch all possible offenders and leaves
1t to the courts to step In and say who
rightfully can be detained ans who
set at large"
OF the ten PACKERS indicted, all but
J. Ogden Armour we're temporarily in
custody while the petition was being
heard The nine were Louis F. S" 1T.
president Swift & Co..: Edward F..
Swift, vice president Swift 4 Co.:
Charles H. Swift director Swift & Co.:
Edward Tilden. president National
Packing Company: Arthur Meeksr.
general manager Armour & Co.: Ed
ward Morris. president Morris & Co..
Francis Fowler. director Swift & Co.:
Thomas ]. Connors, Director Armour
e Co.; Louis H. Hayman. manager
Morris q Co.
The petition for writ Of habeas
corpus contained little material other
than the argument used by the pack
ers before United States District Judge
Carpenter when they sought to have
the indictments quashed and later. in
the arguments demurring from the
courts decision in the indictment coll
troversy. II does 60 into more detail
In the allegation Of insufficiency OF the
statute 60 set up crime. and It lays
more stress on what the attorneys for
the packers characterize as the citi-
sens inability to know whether he Is a
+ iawhreaker or not before jury trial.
Along this latter line the petition said:
'The alleged criminality Of the al
lASed transactions complained of In the
indictments will depend entirely upon q
s particular jury's view Of the reason
ablenesS Or unreasonableness Of tho
particular case. 1t will depend not on
any standard created by the law which
Z may be known in advance. but on one
that may be created by the whinl. pre-
s 1udics or arbitrary view Of jury
There 10 no set standard fixed or at
s, tempted to be. fixed, to guide the citi-
Sen TO q knowledge Of his guilt or in
4 noe4nce Of an oKense charged. before
4 Il has bsen adjudicated.
'sTho net violates the sixth amend
Snent % the constitution Of the United
y Sta4es which requires that the petit
q t1onsrs ssvsrary shall be informed OF
tho uatIEs2 and cause of the ACCUSE.
i 45og1.'' ".
y. further u charged inst the at = ::s 8.
c tamptSi To eGtRh1ish as Q crime acts not
ex5mInaI bun ,c!vil in their nature. The
laI1K nsImbe ot y4tnesses nScessary 20
A6c4 ftIe aultitpdiuous Haplartains Of
e nbAoip wts sbusipess IL painted out
- @ Sp00ttnn of the great cost z
4 ty3aI VII 1al5ose both to the detsnse
md 80 ~ peosecutiou, hence the re-
qnegt th1t the constitutionslity Of the
ast BE determined;