Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1924-02-12
Misleading Whereases.

! Misleading Whereases.
The preambles of the resolution re
lquesting the resignation Of Secretary
DENLY are misleading. They do not
state the reasons for demanding the
resignation, which debate discloses as
those really In the mind of his &C.
cusers.
In substance the preaInbles assert:
O That certain oil leases, signed by
| Secretary Fall and Secretary DENLY,
were, it appears from the evidence,
executed under circumstances indicat.
; ing fraud and corruption. But nobody
| accuses or suspects Secretary DENLY
of being bribed or of any form Of per.
sonal or official corruption. (2) That
the executive order which transferred
the oil-leasing function with it's powers
and responsibilities from the Navy
Department to the Interior Depart.
ment violated the law, and being
without authority of law was invalid,
and the leases entered into in pursu-
ance of it were unlawful, even if hon.
estly made without taint of fraud OF.
corruption, and (5) that the leasing
| policy in respect to naval reserve OIL
| proclaimed by President Harding as
| his own and reflected in these leases
was, whether honestly or dishonesty
administered, in defiance Of the settled
| policy Of the government and hurt
| full to the national welfare.
The alleged corruption Of Secretary
| Fall, the alleged unwisdom and disre.
gard OF the national interest in the OIL
leasing policy Of President Harding
and the alleged invalidity Of the execu-
[ tive order transferring the powers and
| responsibilities Of oil leasing to the
| Interior Department touch Secretary
| DENLY only by implication, in a man
| ner disclosed in debate but not made
clear in the preambles.
1T the executive order relieving the
| Navy Department Of power and re-
sponsibility in respect to naval reserve
| oil leases was invalid responsibility for
honest administration of the leasing
function, it has been suggested, re.
| manned with the Navy Department,
| and Secretary DENLY is to be held to
! account for corruption in the leasing.
1t has also been reasoned that the
| executive transfer order, even il valid,
left large responsibilities Of close su-
pervtsion OF the leasings to Secretary
hxr yo1, T. r.;r
! and consequently shirked to the in
jury Of the national interest. 1t has
! been suggested finally that Secretary
| DENLY erred in believing that the ex-
ecutive order of transfer relieved him
Of all responsibility as we'll as all
power in connection with the reserve
oil leasing function, and that conse.
, quently he erred in leaving himself
! in complete ignorance Of the details
| Of oil-reserve leases which he per-
functorily signed.
The corruption alleged by the first
whereas dominates, Of course, the
entire statement Of reasons for
Secretary Denby's dismissal. The
corruption is left indefinite where it
should be- specific. Is it alleged that
he participated actively in this cor
ruption, or conspired to accomplish
it, or connived at it, or facilitated it
by willful or ignorant neglect of some
duty Of supervision in respect to the
oil leasing of which he had not been
. relieved by the executive order of
transfer to the Interior Department?
A single whereas, stating with pre-.
cision the real reason of the demand
for Secretary Denby's resignation
ought in fairness to have been substi.
tuted for the preambles indicting
other people.
The injustice of using these accuse.
tons against others as the premises
! on which is based the conclusion that
Secretary DENLY must be removed
: from Office is emphasized by the fact
that the American and constitutional
rights of those others, thus accused,
are fully protected.
Before ex-Secretary Fall can be
convicted and punished a jury must
find him guilty. Before any Of Pres.
ident Harding's acts or orders can
be definitely pronounced illegal the
| courts must act And il President
Harding had lived only in a national
election by the ballots Of the people
! Of the United States could his oil.
leasing policy be pronounced unsound
! and pernicious.
But in Secretary Denby's case, on
! the mere recital Of accusations pri.
marily against others, with no spe-
cific indictment Of himself, it was pro-
posed to convict him of something
underlined and to punish him by dis
! missal from office, without the safe
guard of a courts judgment upon the
legality Of his acts and of trial by
jury Of the fact Of guilt or innocence,
and without even the safeguards
against injustice to which he is en-
; titled in the high court Of constitu-
! tional impeachment.
Disregarding for the moment the
issue Of legislative encroachment upon
the rights and powers of the execu-
tive, It was inconceivable that Presi-
dent Coolidge could approve an indict-
ment, trial and conviction debased by
these characteristics and confirm a
sentence Of official capital punishment
thus irregularly and with shocking
disregard Of fair play imposed.