Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1924-02-24
BY BEN McKELwAY.
ovEMBER next holds no sig

| nj nifcance for a federal court.
Nothing could be of less
| consequence to q federal
judge than the political affiliations of
! men responsible for leasing naval oil
reserves. Bitter invective. unfounded
| allegations. partisan debate and cam
! paign maneuvers furnish Interesting
material for Congressional Records
and newspaper articles. but count for
naught In influencing the cold and
i analytical Judgment of a trained,
legal mind.
And as the sweeping barrage Of
/ senatorial debate over the Robinson
| resolution lifts while its guns are
| trained elsewhere. it is interesting 70
| speculate on the strength Of the
weapons with which the little squad
/ OF government counsel engaged by
! the President must fight a battle In
| the courts SO far confined to the
! echoing halls Of Congress.
! The first move in the legal fight to
| come. according to popular belief.
will be an effort by government;
! counsel 20 cancel the leases Of naval
! reserves IN Wyoming and California
! Laying aside whatever preliminary
! steps may be taken in this direction
! the question ultimately to be decided
F.. by the courts will be the validity Of
| the leases themselves.
| In law deed. conveyance or lease
! may be absolutely void or merely
voidable. A patent or lease from the
J United is void II the officer who un-
! dertook to execute 1t on behalf Of the
government was without authority to
| do so. II It Is executed with author
! tty. II cannot he absolutely void, but
IT may be voidable If the government
| can establish accident, fraud or mis-
| take in its execution.
What U. 8. Must Show.
No sane man will question the fact
that there was neither mistake nor
accident in the leasing of Teapot
Dome and the California naval re-
| serves.
Government counsel, then. must
show that the leases are void because
Of lack Of authority on the part of
those executing them, or that they
are avoidabIe because there was fraud
4, or corruption in their execution. Sen
ator Shortridge, IN the course of his
speech opposing the Robinson resolu-
tion demanding Secretary Denby's
resignation, suggested the possibility
that the government might allege
! inadequate consideration, which should
move a court Of equity to. set aside
; che leases.
The Senate. in adopting the resolu-
ton for Mr.. Denby's resignation.
stressed the point that the leases
were entered into without authority
on the part Of the officers purporting
to act in the execution of the same
for the United States and in violation
of the laws of Congress" There is
nothing to prevent the Senate from
stating that such was the case, but
when the question gets into the
courts there are many lawyers in
side and out of Congress who predict
a legal battle which must involve the
careful splitting of many fine hairs
before 1t is ended.
Transfer IL Questioned.
-
the first place, to transfer the reserves
, from the jurisdiction OF the Navy De-
. partment to that Of the Interior De-
partment has already been a question
! for debate in the Senate, and the ar
gurents there pro and con convey an
illuminating picture OF its possibiI-
tiles as a legal point for the courts.
A precedent for the Presidents ex-
ecutive order has been cited in Pres
ident Taft's executive order in 1903.
when he withdrew certain public
, lands without congressional author
/, ity. At least five federal judges de-
cided that he lacked the power to do
this. But when the case reached the
Supreme Court in the Midwest suit
, a close decision upheld the Presi-
dents authority. On the other hand,
! it was argued In the Senate that
President Taft issued his executive
order at time when there was no
law specifically placing public lands
in the hands Of one separate depart
, ment. but since that time-in 1920.
Congress. having the Supreme Courts
Midwest decision in mind, passed
laws directly placing the property in
the hands Of one department.
Therefore, 1T was argued, the cases
are seperate and distinct, and Presi-
dent Taft's action was no precedent
for that taken by President Harding.
Precedent or no precedent the de-
bate on the subject between lawyers
in the Senate who interpreted the
Supreme Courts decision differently
indicates the varying interpretations
which might be placed upon 1t in the
courts. Senator Shortridge, who cited
the Taft Incident, did so to show,
more than anything else, that Presi-
dent Harding had authority for be-
lieving he had power to transfer the
Oil reserves from the Jurisdiction of
one department to another. Whether
he did have this authority or not and
whether that question is material in
view of the fact that Secretary DENLY
Joined with Secretary Fall in the ex-
ecution Of the leases remains, of
course. for the courts to decide.
Question Of Power.