The Washington times., 1915-05-31

there were no transactions between the
officers of the bank and the firm of
Lewis johnson & Co, but it did deny
the bank itself had dealt in stocks,
and counsel for the bank explicitly de-
clarcd in open court that this was the
purpose of the affidavit. There was no
possibility OF msint erpreting or misun-
derstanding the affidavit while the court
hearing was still in progress and before
any decision OF the court on any OF
the issues had been rendered
In view of rumors, subse luent to tho
trial, that the affidavit was questioned,
and in order that the directors of the
bank might be fully Informed. Frank }
Hogan, of counsel for the bank. some
days ago procured opinions from two OF
the leaders of the Washington bar. J J.
Darlington and William G. Johnson,
each OF whom SAYS that the affidavit
Is not only not the subject Of prosecu-
ton: but is not open to criticism OF any
kind
Opinions Rendered.
The opinions rendered are as toll
lows
May 2s. 1915.
My Dear Mr. Hogan: l have con-
sidered as carefully as | could in the
short time l could give to the subject
today, Eour inquiry whether. in my
opinion, the allegation in the atndavit
of Messrs. Glover, Flather * f'lather
OF May 10. 1915, that the Riggs National
Bank never at any time bought or sold
any stock whatever from or through
the firm of Lewis johnson & Co.. can
form the subject of successful criminal
proceeding.
The clause of the affidavit in ques-
ton is open to one or the other OF the
following constructions:
"'ta) That the bank never at any
time. on its own account. bought or
sold any stock whatever fsom or
through the firm of Lewis Johnson II
Co: or
"'(b) That the bank never at any
time. either on its own account or as
agent for other persons, bought or sold
any stock whatever from or through
the firm of Lewis Johnson Il Co.
"A statement that the former OF
| these constructions was that which was
| intended by the affidavit was made at
| the time of its presentation to the court
| and leave obtained to file 1t, as appears
at PIP. 1925 of the stenographic record
| of the hearing-this statement of the
sense in which the language was used
| being made by yourself. the attorney
| who drew it and by whom it was pre-
| sented to the affiants.
"Not Open to Criticism"
"'It is an elementary principal in both
civil and criminal law. and especially
in the latter. that words arc to be taken
in an innocent rather than in an illegal
and especially rather than in a criminal
sense, where they are open to two con-
structionS. am Of tho opinion that, on
this ground, the clause of the affidavit
In question must be taken as referring
| to transactions by the bank on its own
account, and, assuming the statement to
be true in that sense. the affidavit not
only Is not the subject of a successful
| criminal prosecution, but Is not open 10
Just criticism or Censure of any kind.
The fact that, as stated, its presentation
to the court was accompanied by a
statement. of record. of the purpose for
offered, would be strongly CorroborGtiNc
Of this view and should. in my opinion,
of itself be decisive of the question.
Upon each of the principles above
stated. / am of opinion that, II the bank
never bought or sold stock on it's own
Lewis Johnson & Co.. the allegation OF
the affidavit in that respect is not open
to just criticism and certainly not &c
criminal prosecution.
1.-The above considerations would ap'
ply equally to the succeeding CLAUSE ol
the affidavit. that the bank never at any
time made short sales OF stock FROM ol
through Lewis Johnson 4 Co.
That the affidavit was understood
by the Government itself, through it,
counsel, in sense Ca), and, therefore, il
the sense in which. in my opinion, 1t l!
not open to any charge OF talsity II th'
bank did not buy and sell stocks on II
own account is apparent from the tol
lowing extract from the argument o
Mr.. Untermyer. at page $50: 1T 9TH
bank was doing an open stock broker
, age business. and it has not denied
j. J. DARLIGTON.'
e w. G. Johnson's Opinion.
Nav &c. 1915.
l "I have given very careful cons!d
Grafton to the question OF the prope
Interpretation, of, the affadayit q
Flather. and Henry II. Flather, exc
cuted May 10. 1915. ana tiled IN eGult
| caIse No e. 800, Riggs National Ban