The Glenwood post., 1924-01-17

W OVu8To8b On tuO AuSOAv 0AoS.
problem. that "whdle the price u an
important element, there = another
consideration even moro compelling.
- II this main object (low-priced
nttrates for farmers in peace and the
Government in war) is accomplished.
the amount of money received TOR the
property is not a primary or major
consideration"
Referring to German-owned proper
ty. the court said:
Much Of this property was not
innocenuy held or held solely for
trade and commerce. Information ac-
!Qufred by German-owned companies
had been transmitted to Berlin. and
there indexed and made available to
German competitors and the German
Government. The lies of one com
pany were filled not with business
papers, but with pan-German litera-
ture. II was distribution centre for
propaganda in this country"
Upholds Confiscaton Of Patents
Judge Morris pointed out that when
America entered the war she adhered
to the International convention for
bidding poison gas. but 1t soon be-
came apparent thar America would be
fighting on dsastrously unequal terms
unless she should make use OF all the
dread weapons being used against her
by the foe. When Germany persisted
in her attempts to destroy her oppo-
nents with poison gas in contraven-
tion Of all International agreements,
she made 1t manifest that Americas
future safety lay in Americas chemi
cal independence. The amendment to
the act was passed in the darkest
days Of the war (allowing the sale of
seized properties). 1t was thought
mel ports be taken" These were the
circum stances. said the opinion,
(which impelled Congress to grant the
President the broad powers OF almost
absolute ownership. 1t was the intent
of Congress to subordinate mere prop
erty rights to the welfare of the ma
tdon."
OF the value OF the patents sold,
Judge Morris held. in accordance with
the testimony. that while DR.. Carl
Holderman, a German, asserted the
Haber patents were worth $17,000,000
to the Germans. 1.-The evidence is over
whelming that they were and are
without substantial affirmative value
to American citizens. Had these pat
ents been sold to Americans at public
rather than private sale and only the
net proceeds paid to their former
enemy owners these owners would
have suffered an almost total loss In
the value of their property"
Praises Work of Foundation
AS to allegations that the sale was
not to obtain fair value. but to pro-
mote the interests OF the chemical and
dye industries and that the transac-
ton was in legal effect granting q
subsidy to private industry, the Court
commented. this challenge to the
motives OF the officers making the
sale is supported. think. neither by
the facts nor the law. Mr.. Polk de-
termined the public interest would be
best served by a wide use of the In
ventions covered by the patents. II
the property was sold under terms
and conditions that assured its being
devoted to the public use 1t matters
not what benefits or detriments may
have flowed as incidents therefrom.
THE property is In the keeping OF
men who have in its management no
selfish interest to serve and whose de-
votion to the public interest has been
established" continued the opinion.
mo better plan for devoting the
property to public use has been sug-
gested. The plan has stood the most
severe of all tests-actual trial. The
defendant has kept the faith. This
1t has done. not only by granting H.
censes In furtherance Of the purposes
for which 1t was charatered. but also
at its great expense, by distribution
OF books and pamphlets showing the
national necessity for practical devel-
opment of chemical science In Ameri-
ca. If perchance, those heretofore
engaged in the industries have de-
rived an Incidental advantage from
the plan. that incidental result cannot
invalidate a transaction lawfully con-
summated in the public interest. The
same charge would lie against the
validity OF every tariff act.
The sale was in effect to America and
its citizens. not to those then engaged
in chemical and allied Industries"
Judge Morris ruled that II the ex-
ecutives entrusted by Congress with
power Of sale acted within the scope
OF that power their acts are not sub
ject to judicial notification or review.
Invasion by the courts to determine
whether the public interest required
the property be sold otherwise than
under the statutory conditions pre-
scribed and to set aside the sale
should the Judgment Of the court be
different from that OF the President
would be judicial nullincation not
only of the Presidents act but. also
OF the act Of Congress comforting on
the President the power to determine
what the public interests required.
What the public interest renuirea do.