Daily Arizona silver belt., 1910-04-05
h The Halls of Congress
Special washingtop Correspondence.
BY TAV.

the sugar trust and the Taft administration as principals in a transaction which is fast taking on the earmarks of national scandal, the spe- cific charge in the premises being that the gov ernment sold 5500O acres of valuable Friar
 lands in the Philippines to the Havemeyer inter ests, both unlawfully and against public interest
 Once again legal opinion of United States Attorney General George W. Wickersham, who stopped important suits against the beef trust immediately upon taking office, who rendered an opinion uphoding Ballnger and vicously at tacking Louis R. Glavis, and who framed the administration railroad regulation bill contain ing proviso legalizing the Southern Pacific Union Pacific merger is being relied upon to absolve the Taft administration of blame
 Demand for an investigation of the sale of the valuable sugar lands to the sugar trust, present ed in the form of resolution to the house by Representative John A. Martin of Colorado, while temporarily suppressed as is customary with all legislation adversely affecting the star campaign-fund contributing sugar trust, is cer- tain to be brought forward repeatedly to the em- barrassment of the administration. The fact that Martin, the man behind the demand for an
 inquiry, is member of standing in responsi- biity, is attracting the keenest attention to the sugar trusts newest transaction with the gov ernment
 One of the features of Martins demand for an investigation was his charge that Wicker sham had been the former attorney for the trust This charge has been made many times in news papers, and as it was never denied, was general ly accepted as being the case. Mr. Wickersham denies that he personally represented the trust He says his law partner at one time represented the sugar trust but that he was not himself con suited by the trust or by his partner Mir. Wick ershams law partner it develops, was Henry W. Taft, the brother of the president.
 The story involving the sale of the Friar lands is a most interesting one. When the United States government took over the Philippines, President Mckinley impressed upon members of congress time and again that what he wished to avoid was the exploitation by any special in terest of single acre of land, if possible. Ap- parently Mr. Mckinley had some apprehension on the subject because he is known to have wor- ried and fretted over the matter. To avoid the exploitation of the islands it was provided by law that no corporation should be allowed to purchase over 2,500 acres of land and no indi- vidual over forty acres.
 With the American occupation of the Philip pines, the Friars held over 100000 acres of sugar land, the richest and most valuable in the islands. The government purchased these lands, paying $7,200,000.
 On December z, press dispatches brought the announcement to Washington that E. l.. Poole, a representative of the Havemeyer interests, had purchased 55,000 acres of Friar lands A few days later it began to dawn on members of con- gress that the transaction was of doubtful le- gaty because of the restriction as to the amount of land that could be purchased by an individual, which was contained in the organic act passed by congress creating the Philippines govern ment.
 An investigation developed the explanation that the attorney general to make possible the sale of these lands to the sugar trust and other combinations without restriction by law, decided that as they were not part of the public lands at the time the act of congress was passed, the act could not apply to them.
 Whether this was good law can make little difference in view of the fact that the sale to the sugar trust of 55,000 acres of these Friar lands was an open violation of the policy pre- scribed by congress and declared to be absolute ly necessary to prevent just such monopoliza- ton as the trust has been permitted to effect
 Representative Martin declares the Frar lands do come under the organic law and chal- Ienges the attorney general to show otherwise. The theory that because the law does not require by mandatory clauses, public officer to exert himself for the protection of public rights and intaroStC tha ,uhic Officnr is thprpllV justified