Evening star., 1915-05-22
RIGGS BANK CHECK
GUARDED BY COURT
Justice Mccoy Halts 5000
Fine, Fearing Act of Congress
Necessary for Recovery.
INJUNCTION is CONTINUED
PENDING FINAL DECISION
All Other Prayers Of Local Institu-
ton Denied-Points of Law Argued
by Mr.. Untermyer.

The temporary Injunction against Of
ncials of the Treasury Department. In
cludlng John Skelton Williams. con-
troller of the currency: William Gibbs
McAdoo, Secretary of the Treasury. and
John Burke. treasurer of the United
States. restraining them from covering
into the Treasury a check for $4,000
assessed as a fine against the Riggs
National Bank by the controller for al
legged refusal to make certain reports
was continued by Justice Mccoy in the
Supreme Court of the District of Co
lumbia yesterday. Justice Mccoy. in
announcing his ruling in the Injunction
and mandamus proceedings brought by
the bank. argument on which began
last Monday. stated that. in view of the
fact that if the $4,000 should be cover
ed into the Treasury and at later date
il should be decided that the fine was
improperly assessed 1t might be neces-
sary for the bank to obtain a special act
of Congress for it's recovery. he would
take that point of the banks prayer
under advlsement.
While Justice Mccoy did not in words
continue the temporary Injunction on
portion of the prayer under advisement
acts continuance of the injunction,
which remains in exactly the same
force as when issued. and which will
remain effective until the court an
nounceS a formal ruling on the point.
All other prayers in the banks petit
tion for permanent injunction and
mandamus were denied by the court.
Former Senator Bailey, chief counsel
for the bank, stated the case will be
a n
United States for final adjudication.
Counsel for the Riggs Bank. as well
the formidable array of counsef
for the Treasury officials, often refer
counsel, Frank ]. Hogan. were some
what surprised when the court an
nounced that a ruling would be made
informally Immediately at the close OF
the final argument yesterday afternoon.
1t had not been anticipated that the
court would rule on the prayers for sew
srel days. Justice Mccoy advert
ed to the fact that the business OF his
court was in an extreme condition OF
congestion, and said that it might be
some time before he could render his
formal ruling. Justice MCCOY said,
however, that he hoped to make the
ruling not later than July l.
Justice McCoy's Statement.
Justice McCoy's statement from the
bench was as follows:
IT granted a temporary restraining
order because II involved only the
So, 900. and there was q contention
made that II it were covered into the
Treasury 1t might require an act OF
Congress to get II out 1t may be that
/ shall continue II on the same ground
pending a hearing: l do not know
But on the other branch of the case, In
regard to granting any pendente lite
relief in regard to these deposits or In
regard to the reserve agency end OF
the situation, i say what said before
that the case, such as 1t is, made out
by the bill, assuming that any was
made out by the bill for the purpose OF
an injunction. has been met over
whelmingiy. in my opinion. by the
proofs which are here in the form OF
affidavits. and shall deny that relief
pending the action.
Il was struck when I first read the
bill by the allegation on page IA OF
the printed bill here which l directed
attention to the other day:
Plaintiff further AYERS that prior to
December. 1913. the defendants McAdoo
and Williams had, in ways which viii
be fully detailed in the evidence to be
taken in this suit. openly and pub
licly manifested their personal malice
toward certain of plaintiffs officers.
Il wondered what that meant. and l
do not know to this minute what it
means. but. of course, there is an alb
sence. hot of evidence. but of the state
ment o. any ultimate facts that would
sustain that allegation in the bill; and
when i came TO read this Tribune arti-
Gle which appears there, and the Incl
dent which occurred in Mr.. McAdoo's
ottice. shenever ii was, coupled with
that if i were obliged to resort to that.
j should say that perhaps it was shown
that the malice was the other way.
Fail to Show Defendants Aggressors.
In view of the absence, as I say. of
any statement here as to backing up
this general allegation. and coupled
with what is in there. do not see how
anybody can fail reasonably TO reach
shat conclusion and that il there were
bad blood do not know as 10 that
If there is anything between the par
l:es. there is nothing here to shew that
the two defendants were the agrees
ors in the matter.
Then, again. / do not think II is nee
essary here to decide whether there
has been any arbitrary exercise OF
in regard to this question of the re-
serve agency, or any threat OF an ex-
ercise Of arbitrary power.
1T seems to me. on the record that
government officials would have been
remiss II they had consented to per-
NIT the bank to act as agent for a
new applicant bank, because. / think.
for the purposes OF this motion. al
ways. now-I am not passing on the
ultimate merits of the case-there 10
evidence here of persistent violations
of the law, and that they began. not
with Mr. williams incumbency of the
ONCE land that has another bearing.
perhaps. on the question Of what AMI
mated Mr.. Wiliiams). but they began
before he came there and there is
evidence that they are continuing un-
I'll this day; and even II the controller
is wrong about what kind of a bank
ought to have government deposits
namely, a so-called commercial bank
or stock exchange bank), even il those
features were not in there. the other
features of violations of the law are
in there: and ] should say that he was
quite right in determining to take out
those deposits. or at least to say that
there should not be any further selec-
tion of this bank as reserve agent
While II may have nothing to do
with the law of the case. | suppose
that all judges have some right to con-
slider matters of banking policy when
they called upon to decide legal
questions. should say that the policy
OF not having large deposits in so
pared with the amount of deposits in
commercial banks was absolutely
good and sound policy: and the fact
that Congress thinks so is now en-
bodied in the federal reserve act
This question about whether or mot
stocks are good. and whether or not
dealing IN stocks is any different from
dealing in oats and grain and steers
and hogs and that kind Of things. is ar
argument that does not need to be n
sweSed.
Taken Under Advisernenf