Evening star., 1926-06-18

decide that a Commissioner Of the Dis
trict Of Columbia is an impea cha bic
ofhcial, and adding that none Of the
cases cited by counsel for Commits
sioner Fenning bear directly on this
question, Representative John T..
Rankin of Mississippi, proponent cf
the Blanton charges against Commits
sioner Fenning. has filed his reply
brief with the judiciary subcommittee
handling the case. and 1t appears to-
day In the appendix to the Congress
sional Record
He contends that Mr.. Blanton should
not only not be punished as sought by
opposing counsel. but should he given
the thanks OF Congress and the graft
tude not only Of the people Of the Dis
trict of Columbia hut Of the ex service
! men of the country"
Mr.. Rankin gives considerable space
| In his reply to the question OF whe her
Mr.. Fenning is guilty of emheZZlement
| in accepting commissions on bonds,
and contends that such alleged en-
bezzlement extends over a period of
! years, adding that the Attorney Gen
eral CT the United States and the
| Supreme Court OF the District OF Co
lumbia should act by instituting pro
ceedings against the local official.
| cites Business Connections.
He also argues at some length that
| Commissioner Fenning is amenable to
the prohibition of section Al of the
United States Criminal Code forbid
ding any persons from acting as an
officer of the United States in the
| transaction of business with a bust
ness concern with which he is con-
nected or in which he has pecuniary
| interest.
+, Taking up the suggestion contained
! in Mr.. Hogan's brief that Mr.. Blan-
| ton should he punished, Rankin says
! that the defense counsel uses Ian
guage which if one Representative
| should Use on the floor of the House
| with reference to another might, un-
der the rules Of the House, be stricken
! from the Record
First asking for what Mr.. Blanton
| should be punished, Mr.. Rankin then
| interrogates:
| For unmasking the plunder bund
of Washington? Indications are that
| ne has just scratched the surface.
| Congress Is charged with the high
est duty toward the people Of the
| District of Columbia. They are
! forced by their peculiar situation to
| depend upon Congress and the Presi-
dent of the United States to see that
| the affairs Of the District are honest
| ly and decently administered. and
they have right to expect that none
of those so charged shirk their re-
| sponsibility."
Wants Testimony Read.
Mr. Rankin says that he does not
ask members of Congress to rely
upon the charges made by Mr.. Blan-
ton or by any one else. but he does
urge them To read all the testimony
taken in the hearings and then to
decide whether or not these men nave
been cruelty mistreated. neglected
and plundered. He goes into the
cases of Adler and Anderson, citing
| figures. taken from the hearings. 10
hear out his contention that Mr..
Fenning received more money from
these cases than did his wards.
As 10 the contention by the defense
that this money WAS deposited In the
bank 10 the credit Of the guardian
as such. MIR. Rankin SAYS:
This money was not appropriated
by a generous Government to build
up an estate for this ward to leave
hen he dies or to enrich a guardian
while he lives, but was intended to
furnish the necessities and comforts
Of life sufficient to help him fight his
battle back. II possible, TO perfect
health. Instead of that, they are put
in ST. EiiZsbeth's Hospital, fed,
housed and slept not only with the
beggars of the street who are com
mitted TO that institution. but with
the hopeelssly and perhaps violently
nd criminally insane. II the money
for these boys had been properly ex-
pended upon them. and they had been
given that treatment which their
cases required and which these funds
would have amply supplied. many of
them would today be restored to their
normal condition OF health and sanity
a nd be enjoying the od-given bless
ing OF American life as well as the
consciousness Of a Nations graft
tude."
FennIng White Connections.
He points out that defense counsel
do not deny allegations that Mr.. Fen
ming and DIR. White have joint bank
account; that they wrote book to-
gether many years ago: that Fenning
has access to the secret records of st.
Eliza beth's Hospital and that he is
the only person not connected with
that institution that has such privi-
lese: that when DIR. White was in
vestigated 20 years ago Fenning went
to his defense; that 1T ts practically
Impossible to get a person released
from St. Elizabeth's Hospital without
DIR. Whites consent.
Referring to citations made by Mr..
Hogan to show that Mr.. FenninS is
not a Federal officer, he points out
that in the cases of Barnes VS.. Dis
trict Of Columbia and District OF Co
mmbia VS.. Woodbury., the question az
to whether the Commissioners OF the
District Of Columbia, who are APP
pointed bS the President 0f the
United States and confirmed by the
Senate bonded to the United States
and take the oath of all Federal
officers, cea sed to be officers Of the
United States because officers Of the
municipal corporation WAS not even
touched upon.
Dealing further with the authori-
ties on this question Mr.. Rankin says:
"Mr. Hogan. in citing from Barnes
VS.. District of Columbia (S1 U. s., 64O),
leaves out Of the citation section 81
OF the act Of February 21, 1871. en-
titled AN aot to provide a. govern
nont for the District Of Columbia"
the very part of the section which
indicates, in the opinion OF the SUI
preme Court of the United States,
that the Commissioners are impeach-
abls officers The opinion says, in
section 81, paragra phi /: The four per
sons composing this board, mea ming
the board Of public works, are nom
mated by the President and hold
their Offices for q fixed period Of time.
They cannot be removed except by
the President Of the United States.
The same thing IL true OF the COVER
nor and OF the secretary OF the Dis
trict. except as to them there is no
power Of removal. Each IS appointed
in the same manner and holds until
the expiration of his term and until
his successor Is qualified.