Show r 5 4 5 r ti j I STANDARD N OIL 0 FilES ITS ANSWER Urges Upholding of Decision of the Court of Appeals Reversing Judgment Against Company Lawyers for Colossal Corporation Do DoIng DoIng DoIng Ing Everything In Their Power to Prevent ColI Collection of Fine of Imposed by Landis Chicago Counsel Counsel for the Standard Oil on company of Indiana In an answel filed flIed on Thursday to the tho petition of o. the government attorneys for a r re rehearing bearing hearing of ot the tho appeal from Judge LandIs' LandIs Judgment fining the com corn l zany any for tor tho the violation ol oi tho the antl rebate anti rebate laws uphold the tho d decision do de of Judges Grosscup BaKer Daker and Seaman of ot the United States circuit court of appeals reversing the tho jud Judg went and nd lifting tho the burden of the enormous fine as good law v amply Justified by the records of the case caseIn caseIn caseIn In the petition for rehearing the reviewing Judges are charged with wiLt that Judge Landis attempt attempted ed to try and punish the Standard Oil on company of New Jersey In the original proceedings which werE iere against the tho Standard Oil Ott company 01 oi Indiana On this point the tho ans el declares It to be bo a matter of no con consequence consequence sequence whether the trial court referred referred referred re re- re- re to the New Jersey company I or 01 or the Indiana company as not a s virgin offender The real point Is says the answer dl did 1 the trial court In Imposing punishment take Into consideration the relations between the Standard Oil on company of ot Indiana and did lid It base Its fine upon the wealth of tho the Standard Oil on company of New Jersey and its ability to pay Instead of upon upon the wealth of the Standard Oil on com corn rany of Indiana and its ability to pay To determine this question the Standard Oil on company's attorneys assert assert as as- sert fert that a few sentences extracted by the government counsel from the words of Judge Landis are not sufficient sufficient sufficient suf suf- suf- suf and quote at length from Judge Landis' Landis opinion to show that lie referred to tho the New Jerse Jersey corporation cor cor- as the real defendant and to the Indiana company as as the nomInal nominal nominal nom inal defendant The conclusion stated hv hy the answer answer an an- Is that the enormous fine Inflicted Inflicted In In- upon the defend defendant nt was because because be he- cause of th the own ownership of Its stock stockby stockby hv by by the Standard Oil of t New Jersey and because of or the financial l standing of th the latter corporation Is Id beyond dispute when the entire Ion lon of or the trial court Is Is' considered |