Evening star., 1925-07-28
W|TTNER'S COUNSEL
HAS SUIT ON BIBLE
DELAYED TWO DAYS
CrandaH Mackey, Appearing
for Atheist, Saves Case
From Discontinuance.

Arguments on the admission of the
"Bible disrespect" suit filed in the
District Supreme Court by Loren H.
Wittner We're continued until Friday
today after Justice Siddons had failed
in his request that they be disposed
of this morning, due to the crowded
conditions of the docket.
A surprise was caused when Gran
dal Mackey, former district attorney
Of Arlington County and local law
yer, put in an appearance for Witt
ner and demanded that the plaintiffs
counsel be given the customary two
days to consider the dismissal mo-
tions filed by Corporation Counsel
Frank H. Stephens for the District
government and United States At
torney Peyton Gordon for the United
States.
Threshold Question.
Mackey's appearance came after
Bird H. Dolby, counsel for Wittner,
Mr.. Gordon and Ringgold Hart, as
sistant corporation counsel, had
agreed to discuss today the single
clause in both dismissal motions
which Justice Siddons said it was
essential to settle before anything
else was considered. Dolby at first
demanded the legal three days notice,
but on the urging of Justice Siddons
he agreed that the matter be heard
today.
The point dealt with the right of
Wittner to seek an injunction against
the payment of public moneys as
Federal taxpayer without showing
that he sustained any special damage
thereby, giving him different status
from that of any other Federal tax
payer. This Justice Siddons char
acterized as the threshold question"
upon which everything else depended.
Mr.. Hart said that he was willing
to go on with the case on behalf
of the District, although Wittner's
action in not disseminating the case
caught him by surprise. Wittner and
Dolby, he said, had appeared in Cor
poration Counsel Stephens office late
yesterday afternoon and promised to
discontinue. Only a few minutes be-
fore the case was called, he said,
Dolby informed him that they had
changed their minds.
May Discontinue Case.
Dolby told the court that they might
decide to discontinue before Friday
or might press the case if 1t was
to dismiss were not well taken or
could be overcome by amendments.
Mr.. Gordon then began to recite
the precedent of the rockingham VS..
Mellon case, where a Federal tax
payer tried to restrain the Secretary
of the Treasury from expending for
that purpose money appropriated by
Congress to support welfare work for
mothers. 1t was in the midst of this
citation that Mackey interrupted.
He said that Dolby had not under
stood to what he was agreeing when
he had acceded to the request of the
court.
In continuing the case Justice Sid
dons made clear that he would hear
no other angle of the motion to dis
miss until the rockingham precedent
was settled. He told Dolby that he
had assumed, when he issued the rule
to show cause last Wednesday, that
Wittner and his counsel had given
full consideration to this famous prec
edent and would be able to state
their reasons for believing it could be
overcome at any time.
The decision of Wittner and his at
torneys to continue the fight came at
a conference at Dolby's office last
night after the appearance in Corpor
alton Counsel Stephens office.
Justice SiddonS said that while he
would not refuse the plaintiff the re-
quested delay, the business of the
court was very heavy, that much of
it demanded immediate attention, and
that a continuance on question
which could be argued at once would
constitute needless waste of time.
That the case is attracting wide at
tention was shown by the number of
q