Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-02-09
CASES. OF HUGHES
LISTED BY. NORRIS
Action May POrtend Fight
in Senate Tomorrow on
Confirmation.

SItdIiCb GNht1S k1ukucS lOT SIllcI jug
tice Of the Supreme Court tomorrow,
. list OF the. cases in which Mr. Hughes
has appeared as counsel before the
Supreme Court since January 1, 1925,
and up to February was given out
yesterday.
Senator Norris. chairman of the judi
ciary committee, made the list public
but in doing so indicated he had no
comment to make.
It Is understood that Senator Norris
had the list prepared by the clerk OF
the judiciary committee at the request
of some Of the members of the COM
mittee. In Senate circles yesterday
there was no little speculation as to
whether 1t portended a tight against
Mr.. Hughes confirmation. Senator
Norris, although not discussing the
giving out of the list of cases, indi-
Gated he did not know of opposition
in the committee.
1t is pointed out that Mr.. Hughes
will be unable to participate in the
elaboration of these cases yet before
the court. This always has been the
practice of the court.
Cases Held Important.
The list contains a total of 81 cases.
All are well known legal controversies,
especially so to attorneys and others
who follow the Supreme Court pro-
ceedlnRgi closely They include rail-
road and public utility cases Of great
moment, as we'll as radio cases and, in
general. cases involving some of the
greatest corporation litigation OF the
last Ave years.
Among the cases is that Of the Inter
borough Rapid Transit Co. involving
the scent fare on New York Subways.
In this case Mr.. Hughes appeared for
the Interborough sAnother noted case is
that of United States ct al VS.. Los
Angeles Il Salt Lake Railroad Co. In
this Mr. Hughes appeared for the rail-
road company in support of valuation
contentious made by the road.
In the recent WGY case, that OF the
Federal Radio Commission VS.. General
Electric Co, Mr.. Hughes was counsel
for the General Electric Co., but with
drew when his son was appointed solicit
tor general.
List of Cases Given.
The list of cases is given below, with
date of argument, and with the name of
the clients for whom Mr.. Hughes APP
Prouost ct al. VS.. United States $50
and United States 443, argued November
10. 1925; Victor Talking Machine Co. VS..
Brunswick Bake. Cohender Co., 269
United States SAT, November %, 1925;
Beech-Nut Packing Co. VS.. p. Lorillard
Co.. 269 United States ssh, January IL,
1926; Brunswick Bake Collender GO; vs.;
Victor Talking Machine Co., 269 United
States SOL, November %, 1925; United
States eI rel. Hughes VS.. Gault. 27l
United States 49, April %, 1926:
AppIeby VS. City of New York, 271
United States 364. Marchsl and 2. 1926;
Appleby VS.. Delany, 27l United States
403, March / and 2. 1926; BarTotes VS..
Lord, 2Tl United States 577, December 3
and 9. 1928; David sBeiais,1 Inc, rs.
Goldsmith Brothers smelling & Refining
Co., all United States 6s7, June z, 1925;
Hanover Fire INSURANCE Co. VS.. Harding,
county treasures 90 United States 4s4,
October 10, 1926: Duffy, former collector,
vs.. Mutual AEbsH, Life Insurance Co.,
272 United SkstesselS, October p and
Angeles d san Eh6e RHfEradd CO.. 273
United States 2p9, January 8 and {. 1927;
United States Us. Ttent0n Potteries Co.,
273 United States 3e2 November 80 and
December l, 1926; @Beech-NEt Packing
Co. VS.. p. Lorillard CO., 373 United
States sac. March II and ID, 1927;
Victor Talking Machine Co. VS.. Bruins
States $40, March, IA, 1927: Max Hart
VS.. B. F. Keith Vaudeville Exchange ct
al. ara United States 703, October ID,
1875; Max Hart VS.. B. F. Keith VdUde-
rifle Exchange ct al, 2T3 United States
704. October 10. 1926; zimmeTmGnn Us.
Sutherland, alien property custodian e;
al. 273 United States $50, February Is.
1927; Deutsche Bank Of Berlin, Ger
many vs.. Leopold Zimmerman ct al.
273 United States $780, February 25,
1877; Zimmerman vs.. Sutherland, alien
property custodian, 274 United States
253. March /. 1927. Weedin. commits
sioner Of immigration. VS.. Chin Botr,
274 United States $50, March l6, 1927;
William II. Blo&gett, tar commissioner,
Va. SHERMAN s al, 274 United States
72s, April 10. 1274 Thompson StGrrett
Co. VS.. La BelleeIron Works, 274 United
States 7ts, May 81, 1927; Mason VS..
Routzahn. collector ais United States
IT'S. October 6, 1877, Hughes was amicus
curiae: Richmoisd aSeTeiD Anchor Co. VS..
United States. US United States 33l,
December /, 1877; Barber Asphalt Paw
ing Co. VS.. Standard Asphalt d Rubber
Co.. ais United States 372, October 4
and S. 1927; Aetna Insurance Co. VS..
Hyde, 275 United States 40. December
2. 1927; Holland Furniture Co. vs..
Perkins Glue Co., ATS United States 512,
October II, 1927 Mark Skinner Willing
and the Northern Trust Co., trustee, VS..
Chicago Auditorium Association, 275
Springfield Boiler Co. VS.. Babcock l.
Wilcox Co., ATS United States 528, Oc-
tober 10, 1927 SUift g. Co. VS.. United
States, 276 United States 311, October 3
and 4. 1927; Westinghouse Electric l.
Manufacturing Co. VS.. United States
General Electric Co. ct al, 276 United
States $40. February 20, 1928; WeSting-
house Electric & Manufacturing Co. VS..
De Forest Radio Telephone d. Telegraph
Co. ats United States $40, February 20,
1928: Aetna Insurance Co. VS.. Baker
superintendent of insurance, 276 United
States 626, March 5, 1928; Btod0ett VS..
SHERMAN, at United States !, March
IL and IS, 1928; Holland Furniture Co.
vs.. Perkins Glue Co, att United States
Chicago Auditorium Association, 277
United States 274, April 10 and 20, 1928.
Served as Special Master.
wisconsin VS.. Illinois, 27s United
States 367 (Mr. Hughes was special
MASTER Westinghouse Electric Manu-
featuring Co. VS.. De Forest Radio Tele-
phone a. Telegraph Co., 278 United
states 562, October 18 and 10, 1928;
Westinghouse Electric g. Manufacturing
Co. VS.. United States ct al, 278 United
States 562, October 10 and l9, 1928;
United States Industrial Chemical Co.
VS.. Theroz Co., 276 United States
Copper Mining CO. VS.. Carson Invest
ment Co., 278 United States 635, Oc-
tober %, 1928; SGtteTthUdit VS.. McMan
OIL l. Gas Co., 278 United States States
$40. October %, 1928; Gilchrist VS..
Interborou0h Rapid Transit Co., 279
United States 159, January IA, Is and
is. 1929; Wabash Railroad Co. vs. Bar
clay & Willoughby Co. 279 United
States. s2S, March IL, 1929; Austin VS..
BARCLAY & Willoughby Co. 279 United