Evening star., 1927-11-28
Papers Served on William
and w. Sherman Burns
and Charles /. Veitsch.
NOTICE STILL AWAITED
FROM SINCLAIR AND AIDES
U. S. Attorneys Office Shows Con
Germ Over Failure to Re-
ceive Word Of Acceptance.

Sinclair. Burns criminal contempt pro.
ceedings instituted by United States
Attorney Peyton Gordon on charges of
tampering with the Teapot Dome trial
jury, today accepted service of Justice
Frederick L. Siddons' court order call
ing upon them to appear before him
December s, and show cause why they
should not be cited in contempt Of
court.
They were: William J. Burns,
founder Of the detective agency bear.
ing his name; w. Sherman Burns, his
son, secretary-treasurer Of the agency.
and Charles L. Veitsch. manager Of
the Baltimore branch Of that agency.
They were served with certified cop.
les Of the Governments petition and
the rule to show cause" by Deputy
East, in the office of Charles A. Doug.
las. their attorney.
At the same time Edward ]. Kid
well. alleged talkative Juror in the
Fall-Sinclair conspiracy case, through
Attorney Samuel McComas Hawken.
today applied to Justice Siddons for
leave to intervene in the alleged
contempt Of court proceedings. Kid.
well wants to be made a party re-
spondent and to be given an oppor-
tunity to disprove the charges against
him contained in the petition of
United States Attorney Gordon against
Sinclair, Burns and four others
charged with contempt Of court in
shadowing the trial jurors.
Concern Felt i'm Other Cases.
While the orders were being served
9
office showed much concern over the
failure to receive acceptance notices
from United States marshals in New
York and Chicago, who were request
ed several days ago to serve the rules
on Harry F. Sinclair. New York oil
magnate; Henry Mason. Day, vice
president of the Sinclair Exploration
Co.. and Sheldon Clark, vice president
of the Sinclair Refining Co. The first
two mentioned are in New York. and
Clark is i'm Chicago. Justice Siddons'
rule declared that II should be served
upon each OF the respondents 'on or
before the first day of Deceuber.n
None OF the Burns men, haIfsai1
statement to make upon being served
with the court order. but Mr.. Douglas
said that Monday morning they would
be in court with their evidence to COM
bat the Governments charges. lndi
cations were that the respondents
would .endeavor to have the contempt
hearing postponed until o report from
the grand jury, which has been in.
vestigating the jury-tampering charges
for several weeks, Is made.
Decision Up to Siddons.
While no indication was given of
the course of. procedure the respond
ents would take. points were raised
that they would object to the 'protract.
ed proceedings in the contempt case IL
the grand jury is to return indictments
so that they will have to stand trial
for the came thing under another
name."
This, however. may be left to the
discretion Of the court, as will the
question of who should hear the case
whether Justice Siddons alone or
the District Supreme Court judges sit.
ting in general term. There are six
such justices. but only three are re.
quired to constitute a general term
This procedure was adopted in the
celebrated Gompers contempt case.
which, however. was defined as a civil
proceeding. Inasmuch as 1t was JUS
tice Siddons' court that was offended.
the solution Of any such question un.
doubtedly will lie with him.
Evasion OF Service Doubted.
The point about whom should hear
the case grew out of Maj. Gordon's
petition for a contempt rule. which
the District Supreme Court and the
associate justices. ...t
Despite the anxiety showed by the
United States attorneys Office over
failure to hear from the Sinclair
group" no thoughts Of evading service
were entertained. What comment was
made was lodged against the mar.
shals charged with serving the orders.
The documents were mailed to them
Wednesday afternoon and it was pre-
sumed at the courthouse that they
would be served Friday. or certainly
Saturday.
No word Of any description has
been received, and inasmuch as Maj.
Gordon and his assistant. Neil Burk-
inshaw. are rounding up their case.
they regard lack of information on
this subject as disturbing.
Kidwell Charges Called False.
When Maj. Gordon presented his
petition in court Justice Siddons in
Quired If he had considered including
Kidwell in the rules which the court
was asked to issue. Maj. Gordon
then stated that If the court wished
him to do so he would file a sepa-
rate petition against Kidwell, but no
such action has been taken by the
prosecutor.
Attorney Hawken explained today
CONTINUED on Page 2. Column H.