The Elk Mountain pilot., 1924-01-17


TO Congress on the Muscle Shoals
problem. that while the price is an
i'm nportant element. there Is another
consideration even more compelling.
II this main object Oow-priced
nitrates for farmers in peace and the
Government in war) is accomplished.
the amount Of money received for the
property is not a primary or major
consideration"
Referring to German-owned proper
~. the court said:
Much of this property was not
innocently held or held solely for
trade and commerce Information ac-
quired by German owned companies
had been transmitted to Berlin. and
there indexed and made available to
German competitors and the German
Government The files OF one COM
pany were filed not with business
papers. but with pan-German litera-
ture. II was distribution centre for
propaganda in this country"
UphoIds Confiscation 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 that America would be
fighting on disastrously 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.
tton of all International agreements.
she made manifest that Americas
future safety lay In Americas chemt-
| col Independence. The amendment to
the act vas passed in the darkest
days Of the war talloving the sale Of
seized properties,. 4 was thought
Psfis Wa about 30 fall and the Chan
mel ports BE- taken" These were the
circumstances. said the opinion,
which fmpelled Congress to grant the
PreSident the broad powers Of almost
Absolute ownership. Il was the intent
Of Congress to subordinate mere prop
eFty rights 70 the welfare OF the ma
doa."
OF the value OF the patents sold.
Judge Morris held. In accordance with
the testimony. that while Dr. Carl
Holderman. q German. asserted the
Haber patents were worth 1900. 900
to the Germans. "the evidence IL over
whelmins 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 a fair value. but to pro-
mote the interests o. 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. II. 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-
suuimatcu IL TUG EuuiiC iutcFcSl- no
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 az.
ecutives entrusted by Congress with
power Of sale acted within the scope
Of that power their acts are not sub
ject to judicial nuIlification 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 q judicial nullifcation not
only of the Presidents act but also
Of the act OF Congress comforting on
tha Preaidanf fha nOwar N dofarv,yDA