Omaha daily bee., 1911-01-02
PlNCHOT FILES ALASKA BRIEF
President is Advised to Cancel Cum
ningham Claims at Once.
EXECUTIVE MUsr MEET ISSUE
Document Saws M Transfer OF Case
90 Court Can Relieve Chief
Executive OF Respon-
sihiIttv.

WASHINGTON, Jan t--President Taft
was appealed TO today by former Forester
I clifford Pinchot and his brother Amos PIN
chot TO cancel Immediately without fur
Their hearing. the so-called Cunningham Al
aska coal claims. In a volumlnous brief
filed with the president In accordance with
permission given in letter written TO
them by Secretary Norton ON November o.
Mr.. Pinchot and his brother contend that
] the record in the case "abundsntly proves
that the claims are Illegal and that from
the beginning the claimants have con-
spired 10 defraud the government"
No report to court or to rehear.
ing Of the case is necessary to secure jus
tee and protect the peoples property"
says the brief The case against the claim.
ants Is already conclusive. We believe
the duty Of the executive in regard to
the claims Is obvious and immediate The
claims should be cancelled by the presl-
dent forthwith
Executive Must Meet Issue.
No transfer Of the Cunningham cases
to court for a decision upon the present
record would relieve the executive de-
partment OF responsibility for failure to
/ have the case against the claimants fully
presented by attorneys Of experience and
ability and for emitting to produce all
| evidence Of fraud available" declares the
| brief after charging that TN spite of the
olearness of the existing proof we be,
lieve IT TO be our public duty to point out
that the whole of the case against the
claimants has not been presented
The evidence in this case goes far
Their than to establish the fraud OF at
tempting by subterfuge to acquire from
the government more coal land than the
law allows. II shows that from the be-
| ginning the claimants acted with the def
mite and sustained intention Of defeat
ing the primary purpose and essential spirit
| Of the law-the spirit and purpose to pre.
vent monopoly and secure competitive de.
| Yelopment Of the national resources"
Regarding the effect of monopoly I'm
Alaska the brief says:
| 1T is evident that an enormous saving
can be made to the people of Alaska, TO
the whole northwest and to the United
States navy IL only these coal mines are
opened under conditions of competition -
1t charges that the Industries OF Alaska
have been for years largely In the hands
OF great and oppressive monopoly, the
! Guggenheim syndicate, which has kept
out other capital, throttled competition
and held Alaska at a standstll."
Five Lines of Evidence.
The brief rectes that the case for the
government is supported by five main
lines of evidence. cited as follows:
"First-The history Of the operation OF
the Cunningham entrymen in Alaska, as
derived from their own records. and state
ments. shows that from beginning to end
fthey are all members of a single assocl-
alton engaged in acquiring a joint prop
erty and that the claimants never owned
these claims separately.
"Second--The book OF accounts Of the
Cunningham group and the reports made
| by its agents are all evidently based on
the assumption that all the claims are
one property owned by one association.
'Third-Erom first to last, the subscribers
took no interest whatever In the situation
or value of the particular claims entered
In their respective names.
"Fourth--within the shortest practicable
time after final certificates we're issued,
the Cunningham associates took steps to
turn over their claims to a corporation
on a basis OF equal shares
! "Fifth-More than one-half OF the claim
ants have admitted in affidavlts that they
had always acted with a mutual under
standing that they would combine their
claims after title was secured and one so
! Confessed at the hearings"
Discussing the charge that important
evidence against the claimants was sup
pressed by the land office agents, the brief
says;
John w. Dudley, register OF the land
office at Juneau, Alaska, one Of these
agents, went so far as to advise Cunning
ham specifically how one OF the claimants.
who had told the truth In his affidavit
would change his statement so as to strike
out evidence OF fraud and avoid investi-
cation which will at least involve an in
! terminable delay"