The Waterbury Democrat., 1931-04-06

flight when summoned as witness that a citizen witness may clog the wheels of justice by crossing the In. ternational border and that the gov ernment should be powerless tt summon him to return and subject him to a penalty if without cause he fails to respond to the summons.
 Ut i'll becomes the appellant (Blackmer) after he has persistent lv manifested an intent to evade his public duty and embarrass the government, to say his conduct was not contemptuous of the court be- cause other evidence was available to the government"
 The government obtained the con- viction against Fall for accepting bribe from Doheny, but was de- feated in it's effort to convict Sim clair and Fall of a fraudulent trans action. Recalling those facts and especially the failure of the Fall Sanclair indictment, Robb said:
 "The result might have been diff ferent had the appellant (Blackmer) fulfilled his duty.
 "He knew, or should have known, that it was as much his patriotic duty to yield his testimony in the governments efforts to uncover fraud and punish the guilty as it would be his duty to bear arms in the defense of his country.
 Robb said in some cases failure to testify might be more embarras- sing to the government than a re- fusal to bear arms against a for eign enemy.
 The justice saw no merit in Black mer's claim that the Walsh act em- towering the government to sum- mon citizens to testify even though they were in foreign lands, was un- constitutional.
 Associate Justice Josiah A. Van Orsdel wrote the opinion upholding the jail sentence and fine imposed on Fall. He gave an evaluation of Former Secretary of Navy Denby who figured in the oil cases because of his part ill the. transfer of the naval all reserve area to the interior department presided over by Fall.
 "Denby was passive throughout" |" the opinion states, "and signed the contracts and lease under misap- prehension and without full know ledge of their contents"
 Counsel for Fall based their prin- cipal objection to the jail sentence and fine upon admission of testi- mony regarding the Sinclair trans- action involving Teapot Dome and upon exceptions to the charge given the jury by Supreme Court Justice Hitzs, but Van Orsdel held the ad- mission of evidence to have been Justified and the jury chairge fair.
 "The whole record of this case," he said, lis so replete with Falls concurrent handling of the Cali fornia (Elk Hills) and Wyoming (Teapot Dome) unless coupled with the fact that the moneys received by him in each case were used for a similar purpose that all doubt as to the propriety of admitting this evil dence is removed.
 "The record clearly shows that while there Is no relation between Sinclair and Doheny, the defendant (FalDl was carrying along the re- spective transactions simultaneously and with common motive in mindo.
 Under the law Fall and Blackmer have until April 23 to file notice of appeal. If the notice is filed they then may have 90 days additional during which time they may ask the supreme court to review the case. If the supreme court consents to review it, the sentences remain in abeyance until the supreme court acts. If the supreme court does not consent to review the case within the 90-day period, at the expiration of that period the sentences become effective