The Birmingham age-herald., 1916-01-20

 ed. then to save expense and to make the trial as short as possible 1t might be agreed that certain evidence admitted in the first trial should be offered in bulk by the government. To this offer the defense would make no objection. Then the trial could be brought to an end cer- tainly within a week and possibly within three days.
 PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE TRIAL
 It was observed while the first trial was in progress that public interest in these very important criminal proceedings was waning, and this has been regarded as ev- idence that the people as whole are be- ginning to take changed view respecting the relations of the railroad to the public and the public to the railroads. Yet in this trial is contained the essence of the question, What is req soma ble and what is unreasonable combination? The Assistant Attorney General, MT. Batts, in his ad- dress to the jury. made statement in which he eXonerated every member of that directorate from any imputation of personal dishonesty, personal advantage or personal impropriety as men and as citizens in connection with the transaction for which as a body they were indicted, the charge being criminal conspiracy In the new trial, and should the case if there be conviction, go to the higher courts, tHiS StdleIuenl or the ASSlSldnt Attorney General will be accepted by the defense as containing the very crux of the issue. For if there were no personal dishonor, no corruption, no personal gains then the question resolves itself simply into this issue: Was, in whatever combination was made, the purpose one which reflects the supreme courts decision that in order to involve fault there must be the purpose unreasonable restraint of tro1n ha hot ir,N tf,.a no, ,.fc cf the country the public interest in the criminal prosecution of these prominent men has waned greatly. But if there was understanding of the fact that the deter imitation of the issue will go far toward determining what may be reasonable combination of railroad properties then it will be understood that other parts of the country as well as New England will be affected by the decision
 One feature of the trial of which law yers, both in New York and elsewhere, are speaking with admiration and some astonishment is the fact that although these defendants retained different coun- sel, some of them men of great distinction at the bar, nevertheless the counsel for the defense as whole acted in absolute cooperation. There was not the slightest attempt made by any of the counsel to save his particular client by shifting blame. if there were any blame. to others.
 The one important brief handed up to the court in support of the motion to direct verdict for the defense was, al- though it was the actual work of one of the distinguished counsel nevertheless accepted by all of them. And it was spoken of as ''our brief.' There is, of course a great deal of qualification that the department of justice at Washington has decided not to prosecute Theodore N Vail George F. Baker. T. Dewitt Cuyler and Alexander Cochrane. These defend- ants were allowed individual and special trial by Judge Hunt. Now the depart ment holds that they need not be tried at all This action will undoubtedly relieve Theodore N. Vail of the last of the annoy ances and embarras ssments which have been his lot since he came forth from his retirement to accept the presidency of the American Telegraph and Telephone com pany And George F. Baker who on the eve of old age, found himself for the first time the subject of criminal indictment. and Alexander Cochrane, one of the American leaders in manufacturing, and T. Dewitt Cuyler, who has often been re- ferred to as man whose example and conduct are worthy of the imitation and study of young men, are at last relieved from the humiliation and peril of criminal indictment.