The Waxahachie daily light. [volume] (Waxahachie, Tex.) 1894-current, 1916-02-19
BREWERS IMMUNE FROM
FURTHER PUNISHMENT
HAVE PAID PENALTY or WRONG
DOING WITH LIVES aCeohD-
ING TO BOONEY.
Letter TO j. VI. Harris OF This ti'y
Is SeIf-EVplanatory. - Jndg-
ment Compared With the
Death Sentence.

the attorney generals department !
asking for Information as 70 the
status of the brewers cases, recent
ly disposed Of at sulphur Springs
and has received a reply which puts
the corporations in class with the
man convicted of capital punish
msnt and Is legally executed, but
nevertheless says the corporations
are immune from prosecution. The
letter from Mr. fLooney reads as
follows:
Austin. Texas. Feb. 10, 1916.
Mr.. ]. NJ. Harris,
Waxahachie, Texas
Dear Sir have your favor OF
the 18th instant. in which you pro-
pound certain questions in regard
to the meaning and effect Of the
iudements rendered at Sulphur
Springs against the Brewery com
panies. You ask:
I'm Just what shape are the brew
ers now as to criminal prosecutions
for their contributions TO political
measures? Are they immune in this
respect, and if 50, why should they
be? why should the settlement OF
their cases have carried any such
provision, if it did?
81 can understand that the depart
ment of which you are the head mas
no part in prosecuting such offenses.
But are prosecutors in the various
counties of the state barred from
any activity in this regard by the,
terms of the plea made and the set
tloment effected?"
In order to understand the scope
and meaning Of the judgments rem
dered in these cases you viii have
to have an idea as to the scope and
meaning or the statutes.
The department filed suit against
each Of the seven brewery corpora
lions, charging, in substance, against
each, first, that they had been gull
ty OF making from their means and
assets contributions for various po-
litical purposes prior to the Act of
the Legislature of 1907; second,
that they had continued after the
enactment of this statute (Which
imposed heavy penalties to make
these contributions on down to the
date of the filing of the suit; and,
third, that these corporations had
entered into combinations fixing ter
ritory, prices. ETC., in violation of
the antitrust laws of the state
We sought in the suits to impose
suitable fines for the penalties in
Cured. asking forfeiture Of the
charters of the corporations and
their dissolution and prayed for such
Iinjunctions as the facts and plead
ings justified.
The defendants entered pleas of
guilty and judgments were render
ed FORGETTING the charter of all of
the companies except one that had
really dissolved before the suit was
filed, imposing the fines, about
which you doubtless read in the pa
pers. AS to the six companies whose
charters were forfeited the law pro-
vides that the directors and officers
which to wind up their affairs.
We therefore asked that during
the period that these concerns
we're operated by the trus-
tees that they be enioined
from the use of their means and as
SETS fer political purposes or for the
violation of the antitrust laws. In
functions of this nature were issued
against all, II must be borne in
mind that our suits were against
corporations and not against indi-
vidalas and hence the Judgment rem
dered against the corporation would
not render any individual immune
from prosecution. if the facts jusS-
fled the prosecution of any individ-
ual.
TIE immunity received by the cor
peration convicted is just such inn
munity as an individual would re-
lceive who was condemned to death
and executed for crime.
OF course, he is immune from fur
Their punishment on this earth. but
he is also immunized from doing
further damage on this earth. So
with these particular corporations
they We're dissolved, they had COM
mitted a capital offense for which
the law took their lives. they will