Evening star., 1915-05-18
Justice Mccoy Indicates He
Differs From Mr.. Hogan's
Interpretation of Powers.
LATTER CITES DECISIONS
TO UPHOLD CONVENTIONS
Argues Court Has Right to Enjoi,!
or to Mandamus Defendant
Treasury Officials.


on the desks in front Of counsel for
the bank constituted this mornings
proceedings in the injunction and man
damus proceedings instituted by the
Riggs National Bank against William
G. McAdoo Secretary of the Treasury
John SHELTON Williams. controller OF
the currency, and John Burke, treas
urer of the United States
During the morning sessions OF court
Justice Mccoy, before whom the mo.
ton of the Treasury officials to dis
miss the case is being argued, en-
gagged in several rather lengthy col
loquies with Frank J. Hogan OF coun-
sci for the Riggs Bank. in which con-
tentions of Mr.. Hogan as to the bear
ing of certain citations on the case
were questioned.
At one point In Mr.. Hogan's argu-
ment Justice Mccoy questioned him
as to his views of the courts right to
issue mandamus requiring the con-
troller of the currency to return the
Riggs Bank to the list of federal re-
serve banks or federal depositarfes. or
to enjoin such official from revoking
such federal reserve bank or federal de-
positary privileges. The line OF ques-
tioning appeared to indicate that the
court differed materially from Mr.. Ho-
gan in Interpretation OF the courts s
powers in such a case.
Recess Interrupts Argument.
While It had been hoped that Mr..
Hogan would be able to complete his
argument before the noon recess Of
court, the argument was not completed
when court. recessed at 1890 o'clock.
Mr. Hogan stating that he would re-
quire about fifteen minutes of the att
ernoon session to finish.
Departing from the denunciatory line
which he followed in his argument
yesterday, Mr.. Hogan devoted prac-
tically the entire two and one-hait
hours Of the morning session today 10
the reading of numerous opinions oil
the Supreme Court Of the United States
which he asserted bore directly on the
issues involved In the Riggs Bank case.
More than twenty such opinions were
cited, Mr.. Hogan reading voluminously
from each Of them.
Supporting his contention that the
court had the right to enjoin or to
mandamus officials of the government,
as it asked in the plea OF the Riggs
Bank, Mr.. Hogan asserted that III 1t
is found that certain acts. such as the
acts complained of. were the result of
a conspiracy to work irreparable in
jury, then the court has the right to
enjoin or to mandamus the persons al
legged to be parties to such conspiracy"
At this point Justice Mccoy inter-
rupted with question.
Where do you find the existence of
conspiracy?
In the dOvetailing of certain acts Of
the persons complained Of" replied Mr.
Hogan These acts committed one
after the other; first, the taking away
from the Riggs Bank Of the District Of
Columbia tax moneys: next the taking
away of the Panama canal funds; next
the taking away Of the Red Cross
funds, and finally In the repeated de-
mands for reports. special reports. eto,
and the reiterated threats as to conse
quences should these demands not be
complied with"
No Proof Of Conspiracy.
To this the court replied, these acts
might constitute evidence pointing
but would not necessarily constitute
proof of the actual existence Of a con-
spiracy."
what we maintain-that these acts do
constitute evidence of the existence of
a conspiracy to work irreparable in
Jury to the plaintiff bank
referred again to the contentious of
Mr. Hogan that the Treasury officials
had conspired to injure the plaintiff
bank.
I can see no evidence of conspiracy
and 1t would require irrefutable proof
Of many acts. perhaps In themselves
trivial. but together tending to prove
that determination existed to work
an injury to the bank, to convince me
that a conspiracy actually existed"
The court was careful to make IL
plain that he was not passing upon the
merits of the motion to dismiss, or
upon the merits Of the contentious OF
merely stating that to his mind no ade-
ouate evidence establishing the exist
ence of a conspiracy to injure the bank
had been shown.
Cites From Many Reports.
During the morning session Mr.. Ho-
gan, reading from volume after volume
of reports, endeavored to show that ir
practically ever case wherein the right
of court of equity to enjoin or te
mandamus officials of the government
or of states had been denied, the Su-
preme Court of the United States had
upheId tho rights of such courts te
compel the performance of certain act.
by such government Or state officials
or had enjoined such officials from the
performance of certain acts.
He showed that time after time cabi.
net officers had been made defendant.
in cases where their right to perform
or to refuse to perform, certain act,
was questioned. and his citation.
showed that almost without exception
the highest tribunal of the land had re.
fused to recognize the plea that sucf
of,icials could not be proceeded agains
in courts of equity on the ground tha
a suit brought against them was vir.
tualIy a suit against the United States
which cannot be sued without it's con.
sent
turning to counsel for the Treasury
officials Mr.. Hogan said:
You have burned the midnight oil
irving TO find a way to get around
these decisions OF the Supreme Court
You knew they were all against your
contentious when you included these
references in your brief. You sat up
nights trying to find a way around
them Why, we couldn't go home al
night without seeing your lights
burning in the Department of Justice
as you pored over these adverse de-
! cisions"
Supports Motion to Dismiss.
Louis Brandeis, understood to appeal
in the case as representing Secretar,
McAdoo, presented the opening argu
ment in support Of the motion to dis
miss.
MAY It please your honor" he said