The Wolf Point herald., 1924-01-17

] W OOuSTeSS on the muscle SNOdl
problem, that while the price is al
important element, there is another
consideration even more compelling
If this main object Qow- priced
nitrates for farmers in peace and the
| Government in war; is accomplished
the amount of money received for the
property is not primary or major
consideration"
Referring to German-owned proper
ty, 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. It was a distribution centre for
propaganda in this country"
Upholds Confiscation of Patents
Judge Morris pointed out that when
America entered the war she adhered
to the international convention for
bidding poison gas, "but it 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-
tion of all international agreements,
she made it 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
Paris was about TO fall and the Chan
mel ports be taken" These were the
circumstances, 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
tion"
OF the value of the patents sold,
Judge Morris held in accordance with
the testimony, that while Dr. Carl
German, asserted the
Haber patents were worth 100000
to the Germans, "the evidence is over
that they were and are
without substantial affirmative value
to American citizens. Had these pat
ants 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 a
subsidy to private industry the Court
this challenge to the |
motives of the officers making the
sale is supported, | think, neither by
he facts nor the law. Mr.. Polk de-
ermined the public interest would be
,est served by a wide use of the in
ventions covered by the patents. If
he property was sold under terms
nd conditions that assured it's being
evoted to the public use it matters
lot what benefits or detriments may
lave flowed as incidents therefrom.
"The property is in the keeping of
nen who have in it's management no
elfish interest to serve and whose de- u
otion to the public interest has been
established" continued the opinion.
No better plan for devoting the
property to public use has been sug
ested The plan has stood the most
evere of al tests-actual trial. The
efendant has kept the faith. This
has done, not only by granting Ii s
enses in furtherance of the purposes
Or which it was charatered, but also Y
t its great expense, by distribution
[ books and pamphlets showing the $
ational necessity for practical devel- t
pment Of chemical science in Ameri-
a. If, perchance, those heretofore !
ngaged in the industries have de- :
we'd an incidental advantage from +
lie plan, that incidental result cannot =
validate a transaction lawfully con-
minated in the public interest. The 7
ame charge would lie against the r
alidity of every tariff act. =
he sale was in effect to America and c
S citizens, not to those then engaged
chemical and allied industries" 7
Judge Morris ruled that if the ex-
,utives entrusted by Congress with N
)wer of sale acted within the scope
that power their acts are not sub L
ct to judicial notification or review. I
vasion by the courts to determine '
neither the public interest required T
e property be sold otherwise than Ii
lder the statutory conditions pre- q
ribbed and to set aside the sale s.
ould the judgment of the court be
fferent from that Of the President il
ould be a judicial notification not H
lily of the Presidents act but also G