Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-11-15
MakeFurthsr { ffort, Tues
day, to Avoid Trial,
And 10 Have Sherman Law De-
cIaTed Unconstitutional.
The Arguments in the Case viii Be
Heard, Thursday.

of tile indicted Chicago meat packers
TO avoid trial and 10 have declared un-
etitutienal, void and of no force the
Sherman antitrust law was made, to-
day.
The latest move was Il surprise to
the government and consisted in the
surrender to the United States mar
shal of the packers and an immediate
appeal to Uuited States Circuit judge
{. c. Kohlsaat for writ of habeas
corpus The arguments will be heard
on Thursday.
The request for a decision on the
eohstitutionality of the Sherman anti
trust law before undergoing trial was
said to have been taken as a necessary
step before undergoing trial to carry
the case before the United States su-
preme court without the cost or delay
of trial
Violations of the fifth, sixth and
eighth amendments to the United
States Constitution ambiguity and al
legged failure of the act either to create
an offence against the government or
SO to define what il set up as an Of
fence in manner that would enable
the citizen 10 know when he erred and
when not were charged against the
Sherman law as the law was recently
interpreted by the United States SUI
preme court in the Standard Oil and
Tobacco cases.
Attorney John s. Miller, who is chief
counsel for the packers, conducted to-
days court action, characterized the
Sherman law as a met large enough
TO catch all possible offenders, and
leaves it to the courts to step in and
say who rightfully can be detained and
who set at large"
OF the 10 packers indicted, all but
]. Ogden Armour We're temporarily in
custody while the petition was heard.
The nine were: Louis f. Swift, presi-
dent of Swift & Co.; Edward F. Swift.
vice president of Swift & Co., Charles
II. Swift, director. Swift & Co. Ed
ward Tilden, president National Pack
ing Co: Arthur Meeker, general man
aged Armour < Co; Edward Morris.
president Morris &. Co.. Francis Fow-
Ter. director Swift & Co; Thomas ].
Connors, director Armour & Co: Louis
II. Heyman. manager Morris & 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 OF
have the indictments Quashed, and lat
er, iE the arguments demurring to the
courts decision In the indictment con-
troyersy
1t goes into more detail in the allie
cation of insufiicieney of the statute
to set up crime and ii lays more
stress on what the attorneys for the
packers characterize as the citizens
inability TO know whether he is a law
breaker or not before a jury trial.
Along this latter line the petition said:
.TIHa4alleged criminality of the al
Legged transactions complained of in
the Indictments Will depend entirely
upon Q particular jury's view of the
reasonableness or unreasonableness Of
the particular case; il viii depend not
on ANY standard erected by the law
Which may be known in advance, but
on one that may be created by the
whiin.s prejudice or arbitrary views OF
fury.
rThere is no set standard fixed. or
attempted to be fixed 10 guido, tiic cit
lies 20 a knowledge Of his guilt or ia
fieeent,a of an offence charged before
1t has been adjudicated.
ment to the Constitution of the United
States which requires hat he pctition-
ers severalIy shall be informed Of tine
mature nd cause of the accusation"
IT further is charged that the act
attempts to establish as a crime acts
not criminal. but civil in their nature
The large number of witnesses neces-
sary tostrace The multitudinous trans
actions of a national business is
pointed out as an indication of the
great cost a trial will impose. both to
the defence and to the prosecution.
hence the request that the constitu-
tionality of the act be determined.
Government attorneys were cut off
from much of the results of their long
investigation into the meat packing
Industry b. the suGden move of the
packers. Instead Of a trial on evil
denee the fight. Fer a time. at least
must be conducted purely as an argu-
inert Of law
The fight thus becomes, not a ques-
ton OF first issue as 10 the guilt or in
nocenee of the packers. but plain
attack on the validity of the Sherman
act. according TO attorneys for the
packers. They explain their position
briefly In this wise.
The supreme court. in the Tobacco
and Oil cases, converted the Sherman
law into an Illegal enactment, since
the court, By placing each individual
Or corporation on 4 standard Of its
town, built upon its peculiar individual
acts. took away from ali individuals
the possibility Of knowing how their
acts were to be viewed by jury lin
the light Of reason" that this obscur-
IL OF definition OF what constituted
cri5le was contrae% to the eighth
amendment Of the federal constitution.
u Short, the petition. say the at
toFneys. charges the supreme court in
depreciation with multiplying the
sherman Law, IN spite Of the courts
acIion IN ordering the dissolution O
the American Tobacco Co. and th'
standard oil CO. only an adverse de
elaion to The packers contention b!
the United states supreme court vii
give the government attorneys an op
pertUnIsy - use tie material the.
1sas<a az. thar ff.s.s .-7s.k ,,rogactffifn II