The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1919-03-08
HUGHES SHOWS
UP UNJUST|F|ED|..
CABLE SEIZURE.
ORDER NOT SIGNED
UNTIL WAR ENDED
Misuse of Powers by the Exc.
cutive Alleged, in Court
Proceedings.

WASHINGTON. March 7.-Charles T.:
Hughes. appearing before tho supreme :
court today AS counsel for the CONNER &
cial Cable and Commercial Pacific Cable.
companies, charged that Postmaster
General BurIcson, by taking control OF
thc marine cable systems five days a1ter.
IN, signing Of the armiStcc. had mis-
ucsd the powers conferred by joint
congressional resolution. had given the
resolution an Interpretation 'forcign"to
~, intention Of congress" and had as
an "ultcrior motive" the forcing OF gov
crnmrrt ownership of the cables. -:
The accusations Of Mr.. Hughes were
,,4ncrally denied by Solicitor General
KIM who presented tho case Of the
government asking that the court sus-
tain the DEGREES Of 1owcr courts, ols-
missing injunction proceedings orongnt
b. the two cable enmpanihs to prevent
I.,c nostmnster general from taking over
tbcir cables and merging them with
those Of the Western Union Telegraph
company. - =
hughes Contention.
Mr. Hughes tontcndcd that although
tnc presidential proclamation under
which the action was taken was dated
November .. it actually was not signed
until after hnStilitics ceased on NoVem-
bcr II. In reply Mr.. King asserted that
tho cables were taken over in reality on
November ., when the proclamation was
signed by the president, but did not pass
into the hands Of the postmaster general
until fourteen days afterwards. .....''
Seizure of the cables, Mr.. Hughes
said. was not neccssitatcd by the ma
tinnal security and defense" as Presi-
! don't Wilson before the cables were
| taken over had declared before congress
! that the war had come to aD aad and
| that Gesn32J and Austria had asSeek
! In armfstice terms which would maH.
, the resumption Of hostilities Impossible.
! Hc denied that tho resolution under
/ which the cables were seized contained
blanket powers and asserted: that con-
gross would never have adopted 1t had
| il carried omnibus authority. He said
| there was involved in the seizure a
| thought Of governmental policy--a pol.
| lev that congress never sanctioned.
! Government control over the marine
T. cable system is more needed now than
| previously to the signing Of the armis.
tice, Mt King argued. He pointed to
thc turning over to the state depart.
| mont OF mn entire wire to Europe. the
fact that American troops nre now on
] German soil and that Germany and Aus
trim are still at cnrnity with this coun-
trv is sufficient proof that government
! supervision is needed.
! Pointed Question.
What effect do you give to the con-
tention. that the seizure Of the cables
was not necessary owing to conditions
prevailing then" asked Justice Pitney.
That is mere conclusion" replied the
solicitor general
The solicitor general further contend
cd that the issued involved in the case
were not justifiable, and no court could
| INQUIRE into them
In replying to this contention. Mr..
| Hughes said there existed under consti-
4 tutional law no such thing as delegation
by congress Of unrestricted power with
no opportunity for official scrutiny and
rcctification. The president In taking
over the cables. he said, did not act
under any authority conferred upon him
AS commander in chief Of the army and
navy, but under powers conferred oy act
Of congress and which could as well
have bccn delegated to any other officer
| OF the government.