Evening star., 1924-07-28
SINCLAIR APPEALS
IN CONTEMPT CASE
Fights HoehIing's Decision
Forcing Him to Answer
Indictment.
OPPOSITION is EXPECTED
Case Grew Out of Oil Mans Re.
fusal to Answer Questions
by Walsh.
OPPOSITION is EXPECTED

Harry F. Sinclair, lessee of Teapot
Dome, today filed in the District
Court of Appeals a petition for al
iowance of special appeal from the
recent decision of Justice Adoiph A.
Hoehling of the District Supreme
Court that Sinclair must answer an
indictment reported against him for
alleged contempt of the United States
Senate in refusing to testify in the
oil inquiry.
The order appealed from is what
is known as an interlocutory one,
which does not carry the right or
appeal. and it is necessary to secure
permission of the appellate tribunal
to entertain the matter before a jury
trial
Justice Hoehling. in his opinion,
invited the taking of the matter to
the higher tribunal, remarking that
the fundamental question of the right
of Congress to compel evidence in
discharge of it's legislative function
is of grave Importance and was
called by the United. States Supre me
Court far reaching'
Might Save Much Time.
Through Attorneys Martin w. Lit
tleton, George P. Hoover, ]. w. Zeve-
ly and G. T. Stanford. Mr. Sinclair
asks the Court of Appeals to decide
the questions of law involved in the
case in advance of trial. The law
yers point out that it is a case emf
nently proper in the interest of JUS
tice to avoid a protracted trial and
to expedite the dete rmina ton of Ie-
gal questions which they call ".of
prime Importance and far reaching
effect in the administration of the
affairs OF government and in the pro-
lection of the right of the citizens of
the United States"
Sinclair, when recalled for exami-
nation before the oil committee, de-
clined to answer any more questions
and the committee reported him to
United States Attorney Gordon. Maj
Gordon and Attorneys Atlee Pome-
rene and Owen ]. Roberts, special
counsel in the oil cases, laid the mat
ter before the grand jury and secured
an Indictment charging contempt OF
the Senate against Mr. Sinclair.
Counsel for the oil .magnate moved
to quash the Indictment. and the
prosecution countered with a motion
to dismiss the motion to quash. Both
mptions were argued before Justice
Hoehling. who held that six Of the
nine questions propounded by Sena-
tor Walsh, prosecutor Of the commit.
tee. to Mr.. Sinclair wefe revelant
and pertinent to the inquiry before
the Senate and should have been
answered by him.
Expect U. s. to Oppose.
Three other questions, the court
held. were not pertinent and an in
dictment for refusing to answer them
could not be sustained. An "omni-
bus" count of the indictment which
declared Sinclair refused to answer
any questions was stricken out by
action under the law.
Maj Gordon and the special coun.
sci for the government have ten days
under the rules of the Court of Ap-
peals to file opposition to the grant.
ing of the motion before the mat
ter is taken up for, consideration by
the court. 1t is expected the govern
ment will oppose the special appeal
and will claim that Sinclair should
first stand trial, and, IL convicted, il
will be time enough to appeal to the
higher court.