The Birmingham age-herald., 1911-04-04
Judge HanfOrd Sustains Vital Points Contested
 For By Defendants
BIG ALASKA COAL
 LANDS INVOLVED
Claimed That Courts Decision Gives Government Such Little Room to Stand on That Case Will
 Be Abandoned

Seattle, Wash, April S.-The govern ment lost today it's first battle in the effort to punish the alleged fraudulent locaters of Alaska coal lands. Judge Cornelius H. Hanford in the United States district court, overruled the mo- ton to instruct the jury to acquit Charles F. Munday, E. F. Sieger and Archie Shields. yet he sustained all the vital points contested for by the defen- dants.
 The ground on which the court refused to grant the motion to aequit was not raised by counsel for either side in the suit, but by the judge himself. It leaves the government so little room to stand on that it is said to be practically as- sured the prosecution will be dropped. The lands in question are the English, or Sir Edward S. Tracey group. They are said to be richer even than the Gun ningham claims. Estimates of their value range from $l0o, ,000O00 to a much larger sum.
 The defendant. together with Algernon S. Tracey, brother of Sir Edward s. Tracey, were indicted at Tacoma last fall, charged with conspiracy to defraud the government Stracey remained in Vancouver. B. C.. and avoided arrest.
 The trial of the cases began last Tues day. After the jury had been completed counsel for the defendant moved for in- structions to the jury to acquit
 The arguments of the attorneys for the defense was based almost entirely on the contention that the 1904 law applied to Alaska coal claims, in stead of the general land law of 1873, while the attor- neys for the government insisted that the prohibitions of the law of 1873 should be read into the law of 1901.
 Was Not Illegal Act
 Inasmuch as the law of 1904 permits the assignment of coal claims the de- fendants counsel argued that 1t was not illogical for them to agree to assign their coal claims.
 Furthermore, counsel contended that If it were legal for locater to assign his claim, 1t was equally legal for any per son to buy as many of such assign mentssas he could pay for. thus femov- ing the very foundations from the in- dictment.
 The courts decision today sustained all the contentious of the defendants but raised new one in the following words:
 Foreign corporations cannot law
 
 Alaska either in its corporate name or in the name of any agent or trustee. Therefore for the reason that the in dictment charges conspiracy to ac- quire coal claims or proprietary rights to coal claims in Alaska for foreign corporation, it must be sustained as a valid indictment and the objection to the introduction of evidence must be overruled.
 The court will, however. instruct the jury to justify a conviction of the defendants under 1t, the evidence must prove that the object of the conspiracy, if any, must have been to perpetrate fraud by selling coal claims or pro- prietary rights in coal claims in Alaska for the Pacific Coal and oil company"
 In duscussing the arguments the court said;
 Intended Practical Law
 Congress intended to enact a prac- ticable, workable law and if it's sec ond attempt to do so be not made fu- tile by misconstruction we have such Ia law It is not law made to serve the purpose of monopolylsts who would keep the coal of Alaska locked up with in it's mountain walls, or Is it based upon any fantastic notion that trusts can be annihilated by giving coal rights to no one except the man who by per sonal toll may dig the coal and carry it to market upon his back or upon his head.
 "It is the duty of the court not to misconstrue the law, nor stigmatize President who approved 1t and signed it, by imputing to them a lack of eith- the Congress which enecated 1t and the CT sense or honesty"