Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-12-22
z|HLMAN TO DECIDE
COURSE TOMORROW
IN SMITH CO. CASE
Will Determine Whether to
Ask for Speedy Trial on
Mail Fraud Charge.
FEELS SURE OF RESULT,
BUT ELECTION is NEAR
Company Wins First Court Fight
When Receivership Is
Refused.

Representative Frederick N. Zihlman,
chairman of the House District COM
mittee, will decide tomorrow whether
he will waive technicalities and ask for
q speedy trial or join with his code
PENDANTS in the F. H. Smith Co. case
in attacking the grand jury's indict-
ment charging the use of the mails to
defraud.
It is known that Mr.. Zihlman is
confident of acquittal and that he is
anxious to clear his name, If possible,
before his constituents go to the polls
for reelection next Fall. Although his
friends point out that an indictment
is in no sense conviction, they realize
that a candidate charged with felony
Is under heavy handicap in politi-
cal campaign.
Whether or not Mr.. Zihlman will
file plea in abatement will be decided
tomorrow morning at a conference of
his attorneys, Alvin L. Newmyer and
Wilton j. Lambert, who is associated
with Rudolph H. Yeatman. Mr.. Zihl-
man also will be present at this con-
ference and his decision on the matter
probably will be final. Mr.. Newmyer
said he talked with his clinet a few
days ago and that he got the impress
sion Mr.. Zihlman did not intend to
file a plea Of abatement, desiring a
prompt trial.
Pleas attacking the validity Of the
indictment were filed several days ago
BY Mr.. Lambert in behalf of the other
defendants Daniel r. CrisSinger, former
controller Of the currency; G. Bryan
Pitts, chairman of the board of direc-
tors; Samuel j. Henry, president; G. FL
bert Anadale and John H. Edwards, jr.
vice presidents, and Henry c. MadduX
of the Hamilton Hotel Corporation. The
district attorney must file an answer to
these pleas before the matter can be
settled by the court-a process that
probably will require several months.
rE1n defendants came of victorious in
tIIe44 nrSt legal skirmiSh yesterday when
Justice Alfred A. Wheat refused to ap-
point temporary receiver for the COM
pany. He also denied the injunction
which had been asked by four OF the
bondholderS.
THE appointment of a receiver for a
corporation Justice Wheat said, 'is a
serious matter. and it is not to be done
except in accordance with well recog-
nized principles of law. There is MOTH
ing to show that the Smith Co. is in
solvent, and to grant the plaintiffs re-
quest at TINS time would beneht no one
but the receiver and might work great
injury to the interests of the individuals
holding the company's preferred stock.
The motion for receiver and injunc-
ton was filed by w. Gwynn Gardiner,
representing the four plaintiffs. They
alleged through him that the corpora
ton was dissipating its assets, and that
certain of its officers were removing pa
perS and effects from this jurisdiction,
thereby jeopardiZing their interests.
The defense was a general denial cou-
pied with an assertion that the COM
pany is sound finaneially.
With the motion for a temporary re-
ceiver denied, Mr.. Lambert is expected
to ask the court to throw out the petit
ton for permanent receiver.