The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1924-03-21
AUTHORITY TO
CALLSINCLAIR
is CHALLENGED
Counsel for Oil Magnate Re.
siSts Effort to Call Him
Before Body Again
COMMITTEE UNDECIDED
AdjOurns Session Without
Acting on Protest Voiced
BY Mr.. Littleton

""sHiiiSeoH, WdTcH Zl.-l ne flEht
OF the oil committee to proceed with
It's inquiry into the leasing of Teapot
Dome and related subjects was chal
ienged today by counsel for Harry
f. Sinclair when he returned to the
witness stand for questioning about
his possible relations to the dramatic
disclosures of recent weeks.
Attorneys for the operator based
their objection on the Walsh res
olution adopted by Congress directing
annulment of the oil leases. They
pointed out that the resolution de-
clared the leases were made under
circumstances indicating fraud and
corruption and said that if this be
true the committee had to ascertain
what 1T was directed to ascertain
The committee adjourned without
deciding whether Sinclair SHOULD be
questioned.
In long argument presented. i'm
mediately after the witness was call
ed to the stand Martin w. Littlcton
OF the Sinclair counsel contended
that by the resolution Congress not
only had brought to an end the iur-
isdiction of the committee but had
defined the policy of the govern
ment that the oil shall be preserved
for the government
Pass On Validity
You have passed upon the valid
lty of these leases Littleton said.
and as far as the legislative adju-
dication can be effective you have
Iegislated the leases to be void and
have legislatively imposed an injunc-
tion without regard to the property.
You have established a policy of
the government on this subject and
anything YOU claim would be only a
detail which would not warrant the
further examination of my client in
this matter.
You not only say that the leases
were void but the language you use
is very broad and the policy you have
established is very definite. HnYou
have declared the policy of this gov
ernment is that the oil should be
maintained in the ground as re-
serve supply to meet national emer-
gency. You have thus discharged all !
the duties placed in your hands.
What is it your committee is in |
vestigating that entities it to take |
my client who has been here time
and again with his books and papers
and say You must testify further
Have you any jurisdiction which /
entities you to do so under the |
standards and precedents of the AM
erican government"
Never Sustained
The right Of the Congressional
committees to call witnesses and pa
pers from all over the country to aid
in framing legislation, the attorney
argued, never had been sustained by
the courts.
Has it ever been denied?' asked
Senator Walsh, the committee prose-
cutor.
No. brit it has been questioned,"l
was the reply.
Tf.Are was long colloquoy between
L.ttleton and the Senator'S as to the
lights of Congressional committees b
to summon witnesses. Sinclair's
counsel contended that the commit
Zee was without any vestige of
power"
If your idea should prevail" said
Senator Dill, Democrat, Washington. Fl
this committee might as well close
it's doors and quit"
1T should either quit or do it's
work in a constitutional fashion
replied Littleton. Ii
AS understand Mr.. Littleton's s
position, said Senator Walsh, 1T is p,
that members of Congress are OBJ
|iged for the purpose of informing
themselves concerning contemplated c
legislation to depend upon the press, {
heir talks with individuals and other r
voluntary information which any
body may be willing to give them l
'ut they cannot compel anybody to {
come before a committee and tell it 1
he facts"
Senator, your statement is fac b
.tious,' Littleton said.
No, it is not, returned Senator
Walsh. 1T is statement of areu-
nent." -
Court Test Suggested
The argument grew more heated.
finally Senator Spencer, Republican, g
Missouri, suggested that the power :.
# Congress to compel attendance of :,
witnesses should be passed upon as =
quickly as possible. Littleton agreed y
ut was unable to advance a method = y
" which the question would be set :.
led. ':
Calling attention that the govern -
lent had brought suit in Wyoming n
gainst the Mammoth Oil Company W ~
n which fraud was charged against =,
inclair this was another reason why
is client should not be questionedI n
urther. 81
He (Sinclair) is further charged dj
4. this bill (the government bill of
emplaint) with conspiracy to de- r
raud the government" Littleton m
aid, adding that it was doubtful if fr
inclair could be compelled to testi-
Y in court because of that charge. vi