Evening star., 1915-06-14
Brief Discusses the Law.

COulu not subsequently nave peen covered
into the Treasury and remains the prop
erty of the Riggs Bank.
Brief Discusses the Law.
Discussing the law as it relates TO
this phase of the case, the banks brief
SAYS:
IF the plaintiff bank before April /.
1915. incurred penalties imposed by law
by law within a time specified by law.
and the controller legally assessed the
total of those penalties then accrued
and upon that assessment legally or
dered the retention of a sufficient sum
of interest moneys due the plaintiff
bank to cover the penalties so i'm
posed and assessed, then the bank is
without cause of action in this suit.
it's bill must be dismissed for want of
facts emitting it to remedy, and the
condition of the money in the treasury
is an utterly immaterial consideration.
"If. on the other hand, the bank was
not on April l. 1915. lawfully subject
to the penalties which the controller
attempted to assess, then his action.
as disclosed by his letters of March
30. 1915, to the bank and to the treas
urer. was Illegal and utterly void, and
his demand on the bank for payment
of the alleged penalties. and his order
to the treasurer to retain an amount
ol iHoilcN egudl u lIt dllte GU
penalties. were alike vain and futile
things. They amount to naught: they
could accomplish nothing; they i'm
posed no liability on the bank: they
constituted no foundation for any law
full action by the treasurer: they could
operate no conversion of moneys in the
treasury from appropriated to un-
appropriated funds. 1t is idle to argue
that A void act can accomplish any
thing 1t is unsound to contend that
nj Of IL
could deprive the bank of it's money.
so, in the last analysis. there is no
additional phase to that which the
court must determine: If the penalty
bank has no remedy: If the penalty was
not imposed by law, and assessed In
strict compliance with law, then the
illegal action of the controller
amounts to naught and is impotent to
change the legal status of the interest
money involved as part of this contro-
versy. or to affect the banks title
therein and right thereto"
Right to Rely on Statutes.
The brief also deals with the con-
struction by Assistant Attorney Cen
eral Warren Of the statutes concern :
ing the kind of reports that may be
called for by the controller from ma
tional banks. The brief denies the cor
rectness of the construction of Mr.
Warren and declares: The citizen has
the right to rely on the statutes as
Congress has last enacted them for the
ascertainment of his rights, duties and
obligations. This Is particularly so
where highly penal statute is in
volved. 1t would be monstrous to hold
that a bank is to be mulcted in pen
sttfeg hec3nSp nf
rived at by an examination of old laws
no longer themselves in force. in a
case where the examination of the ex-
listing statutory enactments on their
face does not disclose the fact that a
penalty will be incurred.
THE argument of the honora BILE as
sistant attorney general at the bar
the contentious presented on pages
32-45 of defendants supplemental
brief and the appendix to that brief
all seek to have this court hold that
the Revised Statutes constitute but
Statutes at Large and that no one can
be certain of the law without an ex-
animation of all previous statutes upon
the same subject The Supreme Court
of the United States has disposed of
all this. and we submit its controlling
decisions are an all-sufficient answer
to the point that this court must read
the provisions of the Revised Statutes
involved in this case as though they
were written IN the language Of the
statutes of 1863. 1854 and 1868, and
must hold that when Congress enacted
a change in legislation 1t did not in
tend to effect a change.
The defendants contention in this
regard would be without merit in con
nection with the construction of any
plain provision of the Revised Statutes.
but IL becomes extremely unjustff1abIe
when put forth for the government of
the construction of highly penal
statute"