The sun., 1919-01-11

them. The latter. in any event, must
be exempt from impeachment by individ-
ual interests before courts IL Congress
has not the power. obviously 1t cannot
put into the Presidents hands those in
struments which may be essential to the
discharge of his duties except upon con-
dition that he submit to a control from
which In other respects he Is exempt.
That the Constitution should pre-
scribe so unavoidable a system seems to
me unthnkable. without The coopera-
ton OF Congress the PreslJ ent Is sub
stantially without means to exercise his
perogative. If he must justify before
courts any occasion he may have to ac-
cept their assistance Government be-
comes In the final analysis not one of
laws but OF courts.
Having such power, did Congress in
tend to bestow upon the President pos
session at his mere assertion that he
wished It? Without doubt. The lam
gauge OF the resolution Is that he may
seize the cables whenever he shall deem
II necessary His conclusion is the sim
gle condition"
Sees No Merit in Claim.
The court found no merit in the con-
tention of the complainants that the
signing Of the armistico on November
ii put an end to the necessity for n seiz-
ure that was not announced publicly
until November 16. and to the conten.
ton that the lines were operated more
| efficiently than they can be in possession
of the Government. In this connection
he said
THE single question is whether they
possessed an instrument available for
military use. II 80 the President as
NxIA,- t.. ~ 4
| to determine whether 1t was wiser tc
| acquire possession"
Judge Hand found that the emergenc,
| did not end with the signing OF the
armistice. He said the declared aim,
| OF the nation in the war are the meas
ure of its security and that the attain
ment of these aims will not be certain
until the treaty of peace is ratified.
| In relation to the complain agains
the method Of awarding compensation
Judge Hand held It was irrelevant be
cause the compliments possess tho RICH
to appeal to the Court OF Claims. II,
| said:
The allegations touching the parti
ality of the defendant. Burleeon, ar,
irrelevant He will not make the pre-
liminary estimate OF the compensation
due, but the President, who has not We
even deputed the defendant to adv.s
him. Even had he done 30 the fina
decision rests with him and he canno
finally delegate It under the Joint reso
luton, whatever assistance he ma!
take"
1t Is this passage in the opinion tina
offers hope to the Mackay Companies o
! upsetting an award of &1.6S0,000 a.
compens a ton for the seizure OF the lane
] equipment Of the Postal Telegraph Com
pany In the face of prohts Of more thai
81 100000 last year Mr.. Deegan salt
that the Postmaster-General fixed thi
award and the President did not appea
| in the proceeding at all.
We allege in our bill of complain
| that the delegation of authority ny TIL
President to Burleson was Illegal sat
Mr.. Deegan THE court practically sus
tains the position and that, applied Z
our land line system. knocks out III
award OF compensation which Burleso
gave US.
1T also knocks out the award OF com
pensation which Burleson gave TO tn
Bell Telephone Company, the Wester
Unicn and all the Independent telephon
companies. 1t sweeps the whole field. A
OF these awards were made by Burleso
alone and not by the President. TIL!
decision by Judfe Hand would appear t
lnvaldate all of them.
"This eliminates practically our entir
controversy on the land line system an
In that respect is a sweeping victory S
far as the cables are concerned. we sha
appeal at once"