Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-03-14
ROBERTS UPHOLDS
RIGHT Of SENATORS
TO SWEAR SINCLAIR
Denies Defense Grounds for
Stating Oil Magnate Was
Not Under Oath.
JURY UNLIKELY TO GET
CASE UNTIL WEDNESDAY
Counsel for Accused Continues
Argument in Morning-Case
Adjourned Until Tomorrow.

After hearing arguments from both
sides on the motion of the defense
in the contempt trial of Harry f.
Sinclair for the court to instruct the
jury to bring in a verdict of not
guilty. Justice William Hitz ad-
journed the session this afternoon
until tomorrow at IL o'clock, at which
time he probably Will dispose of the
defense request.
Should the court grant the motion,
the case will come to an end at that
point. but if he denies it, the pro-
ceedings will continue for at least
two more days before the jury will
be given the matter to decide.
Rising to address the court for the
first time since the trial opened, Owen
J. Roberts, special Government prese-
cutor and who, with his colleague,
Atlee Pomerene, has been sitting in
on the case, told the court this after
noon that the defense had no grounds
for stating that Sinclair was not
under oath before the Senate oil COM
mittee, as had been claimed by his
attorneys at the morning session, and
that the committee did have power to
summon him. although the defense
IIdu 1lClu lO tIC
Hits Defense Arguments.
One of the principal points of the
defense argument at the morning
session was that one of three Senate
resolutions, under which the oil com
mittee functioned, alone granted
powers to compel the attendance of
witnesses. One resolution authorized
the committee to investigate into the
matter of oil leases and reserves and
this bore the Senate number 2S2.
Another, numbered 294. gave the
committee authority to subpoena and
both were adopted in the Sixty-seventh
Congress.
In the Sixty-eighth Congress an
other resolution, No. 147, was passed
extending the authority to that Con-
gress of the resolutions 282 and 1892.
The latter number was an error and
should have read "294."
Taking advantage of this error, the
defense maintained that 294 was not
continued and therefor the authority
granted in it was not extended to the
committee.
Mr. Roberts, ignoring the resolution
no matter which way il was numbered
declared that the one numbered 2S2,
calling for an investigation into the
entire matter of leases and oil re-
serves, was sufficient authority for the
committee to act.
Under Oath, He Says.
He further declared that the Re-
vised Statutes confer upon the chair
man of any congressional committee
the power to administer oathS In any
case under their examination. he
then pointed to the printed testimony
of Martin w. Littleton, counsel Tor
in this case. and also befJre
the committee on March %, 1924, at
the time the New York oil magnate
in which Littleton said his
client was under oath. "He was un-
der OATH" Roberts stated, land on
the stand in every sense of the word"
Justice Hitz called for the numbers
and dates of the various resolutions
brought up by the defense in its
and requested they be put
in writing for his consideration.
When the luncheon recess was
called by Justice William Hitz, the de-
fense was still arguing and the court
invited more arguments this after
noon from Pomerene and Roberts.
Oath Is Questioned.
The principal points raised by
George p. Hoover and Martin w. Lit
port of their motion for a directed
verdict, were:
No evidence has been presented by
the Government that Sinclair was
sworn as a witness before the Senate
on public lands and sur
veys, popularity known as the oil COM
mittee, and therefore he was not a
The committee was without power
to administer oath or summon wit
nesses on March %, 1924, as this
power had been granted in 1922 to a
previous Congress. and there had been
no authority granted in the succeed
ing session to compel witnesses TO at
tend
On March %. the committee was
under a resolution author
izing an inquiry into the rights and
equities of the United States in the
Naval oil lease and to determine
where legislation was necessary
The committee did not adopt the
questions propounded to Sinclair
which he refused to answer and for
which he was cited for contempt of
the Senate, and the committee did
not direct that he answer them.
There is no evidence by the Gov
that any question asked Sin
clair was pertinent TO the matter
under inquiry before the committee.
Pertinency Is Disputed
If the court holds that pertinency
is a matter of law TO be determined
Dy the court without being submitted
to the jury. Sinclair is entitled to tho
benefit of the doctrine of presumption
Of innocence and reasonable doubt.
There was no willful refusal by Sin
clair to produce books, as charged in
The indictment. as the subpoena called
1nly for his presence and nothing else.
Sinclair never was summoned legally
to appear, as the sergeant-atarmS
was directed to serve and make a
return of the subpoena, whereas the
shows that a United
States marshal of the southern dis
.rict of New York made a return.
Allowing the remainder of today's
session to be devoted to arguments
on both sides on the motion, it ap.
Deared likely that the case would not
De given to the jury before Wednes-
day. In the event the motion is
granted the trial will end abruptly,
lut if denied some testimony and evi.
ience offered by the defense at the
asst session probably would have to
De repeated for the jury.
Much stress was laid by Hoover,
Who delivered the principal argument.
md Littleton on the alleged lack of
,ower by the oil committee TO compel
ne attendance of witnesses and ad.
oaths. Hoover said that the
(Confinuad an paga . CsoI,---