The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-06-20
WILL GRINNAN RECEDE {
It is Hoped and Believed by the Ad-
ministration That he Will, Thus
Avoiding Any Clash at Rich
moDd---0ficials Say
Little.
(By the Associated Press.)

Washington, June 19-The time of the
Cabinet meeting today was consumed in
large part by the consideration of the
legal questions involved in the decision of
the United States government to disre-
gard the decision of the court of Virginia
and seize the incomplete gunboat Calves
ton at the Trigg Ship yards in Richmond
Attorney General Knox presented care
fully prepared opinion on the subject
strongly affirming the right of the gov
ernment to disregard the injunction grant
ed yesterday in the Virginia court which
forbidS the resumption of work on the
Galveston pending a settlement of the
claim of the sub-contractors who have not
been paid for material furnished.
In his opinion, addressed to the Presi-
dent, Attorney General Knox states that
the letter of Secretary Moody raises the
question of the right and power of the
United States to take immediate and COM
plete possession for all purposes, of vessels
OF the United States in course of COM
pletion under contracts with shipbuildcrs
when there has been a breach of contract
with the latter. The question, he says
actually affects three vessels at present
and might at any time involve any or ell
public vessels under construction by priv
ate parties. For this reason he declares
the subject one of ltal Importance in re-
spect to national and sovereign interests.
Attorney General Knox recites the terms
of the contract with the Trigg Company.
which contains an express recognition of
the paramount title and lien of the gov.
ernment. and after quoting at length
statutes bearing on the subject of attach
ments against property in which the
United States has or claimed an interest:
The right of party in ordinary liti.
cation to release of property from at
tachment upon giving a bond for indemni-
ty is fundamental. The doctrine was
recognized in the debate on the act of
1854 1t manifestly applies with greater
force and reason IN a case affecting the
government as parens patriae. than where
the interests of private htgations alone
are involved. The statute enables the
government. although not party, nor in
general subject to be made such, to in
tervene without prejudice and to invoke
that doctrine.
1T is especially significant that section
1853, which is Of course a part of the
supreme law of the land and binding
throughout the Union, expressly refuses
to recognize any right whatever to seize
or attach property fthe United States
or property held, owned or employed by It.
Quite apart from the statute, and because
of the nature of the case, it is impossi-
bic. on primary grounds to yield assent
at all to the idea that any instrument
tality Of the governmental this case ar
inst of tor
be taken into custody and held under any
adverse authority whatever. This view
applies. in my judgment, whether the ad-
verse custody should assume to attach
upon the instrumentality as a completed
thing. or upon one in process OF creation.
while, however it is not to be doubt
ed for an instant that the United States
is entitled to the undisputed possession
and control of its property and of proper
ty in which it is interested to the extent of
of that interest, and that this posses
sion and control are exempt from the
process OF every court, yet, Congress, by
the act of 1864, provided an orderly and
peaceful solution OF controversies that
may arise between parties claiming ad-
verse to the United tates, under the
terms of which the utmost rights OF all
claimants are preserved without the func-
tlons of the government being in the
slightest degree disturbed
1T will be observed however. that
tlls act Is not mandatory in its provis-
ions. and that in a palpabe case of i'm
proper interference with the govern
ments rights the strong executive arm
may De relied upon for the protection OF
It's sovereignty, the language OF the act
being that the secretary of the treasury
may IN his discretion cause such stipula-
tlon TO be entered This is case in
which think that discretion should be
exercised.
The nature and necessities Of the sub
ject. the sovereign claim and interest
the object to be gained, the words Of the
statute. its fair inferences and clear re-
servations. all convince me beyond doubt
that the stipulation to be entered mo
Is an engagement ON behalf of the United
States. which shall be addressed to and
filed with the particular court. under
reserve of submission to the jurisdic-
tion, whereupon discharge of the proper
ty as matter of course would follow. and
adverse claimants would have the on
portunity of establishing, in accordance
with the law, their respective claims