IN RE INFORMATION TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FEBRUARY 11, 1913.-Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and ordered to be printed. The SPEAKER. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, SIR: I beg to acknowledge receipt of a resolution adopted by the House of Representatives on February 7, 1913, of which the following is a copy: Resolved, That the Attorney General of the United States be, and he is hereby, directed, if not incompatible with the public interest, to transmit to the House of Representatives at the earliest practical date all letters, briefs of evidence, documents, and written opinions on file in the Department of Justice relating to or having any connection with the indictment returned in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas against C. N. Payne, John D. Archbold, Henry C. Folger, jr., W. C. Teagle, A. C. Ebie, E. R. Brown, John Sealy, Standard Oil Co. of New York, Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, and Magnolia Petroleum Co. of Texas, charging them with conspiring to restrain interstate trade and commerce of the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association in violation of the criminal provisions of the Sherman Act, or relating in any way to the order of the Attorney General of the United States directing the United States marshal for the southern district of New York not to execute bench warrants for the arrest of John D. Archbold, W. C. Teagle, and Henry C. Folger, jr., issued on said indictment. On August 27, 1912, an indictment was returned in the United States District Court, Northern District of Texas, against C. N. Payne, John D. Archbold, Henry C. Folger, jr., W. C. Teagle, A. C. Ebie, E. R. Brown, and John Sealy, individuals, the Standard Oil Co. of New York, the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, corporations, and the Magnolia Petroleum Co., a joint-stock company of Texas, charging them with conspiring to restrain the interstate trade and commerce of the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association, contrary to the provisions of the antitrust act of July 2, 1890. A copy of the indictment is submitted herewith. A certified copy of the indictment was forwarded to the United States marshal, southern district of New York, together with bench warrants for the arrest of Messrs. John D. Archbold, president, W. C. Teagle, a director of the Standard Oil Co. of New York, and H. C. Folger, jr., president of the Standard Oil Co., defendants residing in that city, with the request that the defendants named be arrested and taken to Texas, there to answer said indictment. Attorneys for these defendants thereupon applied to me, asking that the indictment and the evidence upon which the same was obtained be carefully examined by the department before proceedings were taken to remove the defendants, undertaking to produce the defendants before the commissioner in New York whenever required, and stating that they would contest any removal proceedings in case the conclusion were reached by the department that the removal proceedings be pressed. The character of the evidence upon which the indictment was founded was such that I instructed the United States marshal in New York not to execute the warrant until further instructions, and I directed the United States attorney for the northern district of Texas, Mr. Atwell, to come to Washington, and upon his so doing, I submitted all the evidence in the case to examination by him in conference with Hon. C. B. Morrison, special assistant to the Attorney General, who had been retained for this among other purposes, and Oliver E. Pagan, Esq., an attorney in the department. After a careful study of the evidence in the case by these gentlemen, they reported to me in writing upon it, and also at a conference, in which it was agreed that the district attorney, Mr. Atwell, should return to Texas and endeavor to secure certain additional evidence which it was thought would strengthen the case against the defend In the meantime, on January 27, 1913, Judge Meek, in the United States district court, to whom the United States attorney submitted a motion to continue the cause to the May term, directed an alias warrant to issue, without any new indictment or further proceeding, and this warrant was also sent to New York for service, and I have directed that it be not executed until further instructions from me. The United States attorney has from time to time communicated to the department with respect to the case, and a thorough investigation of the facts and the law of the case is now being had. In this connection it may be proper to state that a warrant of arrest issued upon an indictment found in one judicial district is not self-executing in another district, but that application must be made to a judge or commissioner for the commitment of such defendant, based upon proof that the crime charged in the indictment has been committed by the defendant in the district in which the indictment is found, and if such committal be ordered, then an application thereon to a district judge of the United States for a warrant of removal of the defendant to the district in which the indictment is found. While the indictment is prima facie evidence of probable cause, it is not conclusive upon the commissioner (Tinsley v. Treat, 205 U. S., 20, 31; Hyde v. Shine 199 U. S., 62, 84; Beavers v. Hen kel, 194 U. S., 73; Greene v. Henkel, 183 U. S., 249); and the prima facie proof furnished by the indictment may be overcome by appropriate evidence (U. S. v. Campbell, 179 Fed., 762), and the commissioner in the first instance must determine whether, upon the whole evidence, there is probable cause shown that the defendant has committed the crime charged. In the case of Beavers v. Henkel (194 U. S., 73–83), Mr. Justice Brewer, delivering the opinion of the court, said: It may be conceded that no such removal should be summarily and arbitrarily made. There are risks and burdens attending it which ought not to be needlessly cast upon any individual. These may not be serious in a removal from New York to Brooklyn but might be if the removal was from San Francisco to New York. And statutory provisions must be interpreted in the light of all that may be done under them. We must never forget that in all controversies, civil or criminal, between the Government and an individual the latter is entitled to reasonable protection. Such seems to have been the purpose of Congress in enacting section 1014, Revised Statutes, which requires that the order of removal be issued by the judge of the district in which the defendant is arrested. In other words, the removal is made a judicial rather than a mere ministerial act. It is therefore obvious that it is the duty of the law officers of the Government not to attempt the forcible removal of a citizen of the United States from one district to another to answer to a charge of crime, unless (1) the indictment properly charges the defendant with the commission of a crime committed in the district where found and (2) the Government is in possession of evidence which, in the opinion of the Department of Justice is sufficient to establish probable cause to believe that a conviction of the defendants can be had under the indictment. It is because of serious doubts entertained on both of these heads that I have delayed the attempt to execute warrants of removal in this case. The matter is still pending undecided, and, in my opinion, it would not be compatible with the public interests to transmit to the House of Representatives the papers referred to in the resolution. I am therefore directed by the President to make this response to the resolution of the House. Respectfully, GEO. W. WICKERSHAM, In the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Texas. United States of America v. Calvin N. Payne and others. INDICTMENT. At a special term of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, begun and holden at Dallas, Tex., on Tuesday, the 27th day of August, A. D. 1912, the grand jurors wherefor, good and lawful men, duly selected, empaneled, sworn, and charged to inquire into and a true presentment make of all crimes and offenses cognizable under the authority of the laws of the United States of America committed within the northern district of Texas, upon their oaths present into open court, that heretofore, to wit, on the 29th day of June, A. D. 1912, one Calvin N. Payne, now or late of Titusville, State of Pennsylvania, and one John D. Archbold, now or late of the city and State of New York, and one Henry C. Folger, jr., now or late of the city and State of New York, and one John Sealy, now or late of Galveston, in the State of Texas, and one A. C. Ebie, now or late of Dallas, State of Texas, and E. R. Brown, now or late of Corsicana, Navarro County, State of Texas, and one W. C. Teagle, now or late of Plainfield, State of New Jersey, the Christian name of each of the last three of whom is to the grand jurors unknown, and the Standard Oil Co. of New York, a corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, and the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, a corporation existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Jersey, and the Magnolia Petroleum Co., a joint-stock association of the State of Texas, did unlawfully and knowingly conspire together to restrain trade and commerce among several States of the United States of American and with foreign nations that is to say, that heretofore, to wit, on the date aforesaid and within the venue aforesaid, within the Dallas division of the northern district, there was then and there existing a joint-stock association known and called the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association, with H. Clay Pierce as chairman of board of directors and Sewell W. Fordyce, jr., president, and C. W. Cahoon vice president and general manager; that such joint-stock association was a going concern engaged in supplying the people and consumers of the State of Texas and the States of Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, and Oklahoma and the Republic of Mexico with produce and products manufactured and made from petroleum, such produce and products being Vacuum oils, Capital cylinder oil, Renown engine oil, Atlantic red engine oil, Red "VE" cylinder oil, Gargoyle marine oils, Polarine auto oil, which said oils were known to the trade and consumer as lubricating oils; and engine naphtha, gasoline, and coal oil; and that such produce and products were then and there at that time and for many years immediately preceding articles of commerce in the State of Texas and in the other States and foreign nation hereinabove mentioned; and the said last-mentioned association was then and there, as aforesaid, actively engaged in supplying and shipping the same said products from the State of Texas into and through the other last-mentioned States and the said foreign nation, the said association then and there and at the said time supplying 60 per cent of such products used by the people in the said States, nation, and Territory herein last above mentioned; that the said association was not a producer of petroleum nor a manufacturer or refiner or maker of any of the said produce and products, but bought and secured same said produce and products either from the Standard Oil Co. of New York, the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, the Magnolia Petroleum Co., of the State of Texas, or other associations or companies subsidiary to or connected with the said corporations and associations, securing particularly its supply of engine naphtha, gasoline, and coal oil from the Magnolia Petroleum Co., which was a joint-stock association doing business in the State of Texas, with an office and place of business at Corsicana, Navarro County, State of Texas, with E. R. Brown as vice president and general manager thereof; that the said oils above mentioned that were known to the trade as lubri cating oils were the produce and product of the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, the Standard Oil Co. of New York, and the Standard Oil Co. of Indiana, or companies and associations controlled by said corporations or by men who control said corporations, each and all of which are closely related and similarly controlled, the exact nature of which connection, association, and control is to the grand jurors unknown; that thereupon and heretofore, to wit, on the date aforesaid and within the_venue aforesaid, Calvin N. Payne, John D. Archbold, A. C. Ebie, W. C. Teagle, E. R. Brown, Henry C. Folger, jr., John Sealy, individuals, and the Standard Oil Co. of New York and the Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey, corporations, and the Magnolia Petroleum Co., a joint-stock association of Texas, who will hereinafter be styled defendants, conspired together to restrain the trade and commerce of the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association in the products and produce aforesaid in the States, nation, and Territory aforesaid. (a) By then and there determining and agreeing to have the Magnolia Petroleum Co., which was then and there and up to that time a joint-stock association engaged exclusively in refining and manufacturing, and which said association was under the control of the defendants herein mentioned, engage in the business that the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association was engaged in, as aforesaid, to wit, that of supplying to the consumers in the said States and nation aforesaid the same said produce and products that the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association was supplying and selling, as aforesaid, and for this purpose to establish and maintain a station, depot, and selling plant at each town and point where the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association had one established and operated, even though the said town or point would not maintain two such supply stations, and even though the consumers thereof did not justify or demand such second supply station; and (b) By determining and agreeing to secure and take from the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association its employees and servants; and (c) By determining and agreeing to announce to the trade and consumers in the said States and Territory that the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association could not last and would not live; and (d) By determining and agreeing to sell and cause to be sold to the trade and consumers the said lubricating oils at a price and prices less than the same said oils were sold to the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association; and (e) By determining and agreeing to cut off and to refuse to sell the said PierceFordyce Oil Association any engine naphtha or gasoline, when they and each of them then and there well knew that the trade and consumer would not purchase or buy coal oil from the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association unless the said association was able to also supply the said lubrication oils and the said engine naphtha and the said gasoline; and (f) By determining and agreeing to cut and reduce the price of said products and produce temporarily below reasonable prices and figures, and by agreeing and establishing and fixing and maintaining arbitrary and noncompetitive prices for the said produce and products. After so determining, agreeing, and conspiring as aforesaid, in subdivisions a, b, c, d, e, and f, the said defendants did then and there, on the date aforesaid, and within the venue aforesaid, carry into execution the said determination and agreement and conspiracy, by then and there causing and procuring the said Magnolia Petroleum Co. to engage in the direct supply to the consumers in the aforesaid States and nation of the same said products in addition to manufacturing and refining, and by establishing the substations and supply points, as aforesaid, in each town and place where the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association had a supply station, and by then and there inducing and persuading and securing the employees and servants of the Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association to leave the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association and enter into employment and become servants and employees of the said Magnolia Petroleum Co., and by then and there announcing to the trade and consumers in the said States and Territory that the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association could not and would not be able to supply the said products and produce to the said trade, and that the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association was financially unable and would be financially unable to carry out any contracts that it might make, and by selling the said lubricating oils to the trade and consumers in the said States for a less figure and price than the same said oils were sold to the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association, and by refusing to sell the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association any engine naphtha or gasoline, and by cutting and lowering prices on the said produce and products temporarily to the trade and consumers in the said States and Territory below a reasonable figure and thereby agreeing upon and establishing and fixing and maintaining arbitrary and noncompetitive prices for the said produce and products, all of which acts and agreements and determinations were for the purpose and with the intent of the defendants and each of them of destroying the business of the said Pierce-Fordyce Oil Association and to thereby cause them to suspend business and operations and to cease to be a competitor of the Magnolia Petroleum Co. in the said States and nation aforesaid, and to thereby secure to themselves a monopoly of said commerce and trade and business in the said States and to destroy the competition and restrain the commerce as aforesaid, and to effect the object of said conspiracy to restrain the trade and commerce as aforesaid, the defendants deposited and caused to be deposited for mailing and delivery to the said PierceFordyce Oil Association, at Dallas, Tex., on the date aforesaid, and within the venue aforesaid, a certain written announcement, which said written announcement was in due course received by the said association, and was in words and figures as follows, to wit: Magnolia Petroleum Co. Sales department. A. C. Ebie, general manager. Refineries, Beaumont, Corsicana. Attention C. W. CAHOON, V. P. & G. M. PIERCE-FORDYCE OIL ASSOCIATION, Dallas, Tex. DALLAS, TEX., June 29, 1912. GENTLEMEN: We are sorry to inform you that, effective Monday, July 1, and until further advised, we will not be able to deliver you, at either of our refineries, any engine naphtha or gasoline, and all quotations are hereby withdrawn. M. Yours, very truly, A. C. EBIE. And so the grand jurors, aforesaid, upon their oaths, aforesaid, do say that the said corporations and individual defendants, during the period of time first aforesaid, and within the Dallas division of the northern district of Texas in the manner and form aforesaid, unlawfully and knowingly did engage in a conspiracy and conspire together in restraint of trade and commerce among the several States aforesaid, all of which was contrary to the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. |