Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1924-02-16
MORE DATA SOUGHT
ON EDITORS LOAN
TO SECRETARY FALL
Continued from Page y

as to the legality of the leasing pro-
gram never was referred to interior
department solicitors. He said he
was very certain the program was
legal.
He said the lease negotiations
were conducted ''in the manner of
private negotiations" and added
Il would not have handled them
that way. 1t impressed me as a
wrong way"
Fall Left Afterwards
Fall Washington for his New
Mexico ranch Immediately after
signing the Teapot Dome lease, Fin
ney testified. He could not say
where it was signed.
Before leaving, he said, Fall locked
the lease up in his desk and it re-
NAMED there until he returned.
Asked if he was suspicious,
Finney said Il thought then and
hope now Fall was an absolutely
honest man."
In dismissing the proceedings to
recover sections So and 16 in Cali
fornia from the Standard Oil Com
pany of California, Finney said Fall
had asked department officials only
if there was dispute as to facts.
There was no dispute as to the
facts. Finney said, but there was
one of law. Fall did not ask as to
that, he testified, adding that he
then and now believed Falls action
was wrong.
Frank A Nanderlip arrived at the
oil committee room a few minutes
in advance of the hour which was
set for the hearing.
Crowd Disappointed
The committee assembled at 1910
a. M, and then disappointed the
crowd by calling first Oscar Sutro,
counsel for the Standard Oil Com
pany of California.
e. c. Finney, assistant secretary
of the interior, was quoted as say
ing Secretary Fall considered it 'un.
necessary to have Attorney Gen
eral Daugherty pass on the validity
of the oil leases before they were
made.
The testimony was given by Os
car Sutro, counsel for the Standard
Oil Company of California. He told
the com1nittee that he had suggested
to Mr. Finney that q department OF
justice opinion be sought.
"Mr Finney's reply. in substance,
continued the witness, was that ii
was not the wish of the secretary
of the interior-no, / don't think
that expresses it. He said the secre
tary Of the interior considered ii
unnecessary to have the opinion OF
the attorney general"
Senator Walsh, Democrat, Mon
tana, led in questioning Mr.. Sutro
when the committee session began
He asked whether the witness knew
of the advertisement issued by the
navy department for the construc
ton of oil storage tanks at Pearl
Harbor.
II do" Mr.. Sutro replied.
did your company bid?"
II do not think we made a for
NAL bid"
Why"
He Doubted Validity
"My recollection is that the pro
posal was referred to me by either
the president or vice president OF
our company with the usual request
that | pass on it. A part of my
functions was to attend to these
matters and pass upon the sufti-
cheney of the proposal; whether its
acceptance would constitute a legal
contract, and the usual request for
any comment 1 might make. 1t was
my opinion that the proposal, if &C
copied, would not constitute valid
contract.
Zone of the conpany's officers said
there was a considerable quantity OF
oil involved and that we would like
to have it. l made as thorough an
investigation as l was capable OF
making, and rendered a written opin-
ion to the vice president of the com
pany, who was particularly in
charge Of the purchase of oil, that
the contract would not be legal.
Sutro read the formal opinion
and that [ could not approve it,"
which he delivered to his company
under date of January 81. 1922. in
which he held that the act of June
a. 1920, did not authorize the secre.
tary of the navy to exchange fuel
oil for anything except fuel OIL Elk
change for any other thing, the
opinion continued, would defeat "the
intent of congress" in passing the