Evening star., 1934-10-08

high to enable competitors, selling
at the same price. to make a profit.
Scores OF orders were handed down
by the court, announcing whether it
would review or decline to pass upon
cases accumulating during the Sum-
mer. Most of them were only of
local interest.
The Panama Refining Co. of Kill
gore, Tex, challenged the validity of
regulations issued under N R. A.
Among other things they required
every producer of oil to file reports
showing production, the property
from which it was obtained, the To-
cation of the wells, the amount sold
and the amount on hand. and to
certify the production did not violate
any State law or regulation.
In the Amazon case, a number of
producers brought suit against the
Texas Railroad Commission, the State
law enforcement officers and Federal
representatives charged with enforce
ment of the recovery act and the
petroleum code.
81, 3. They asserted the Railroad Com
mission had entered into an illegal
plan with conservation boards of other
oil producing States to limit the pro-
duction of crude petroleum and that
the Federal Government vas aiding
In enforcing the curtailment.
.... Artificial Demand Aim.
1t also was contended that the cur
tailment was to create an artificial
market demand and force high prices.
that the Texas Commission had re-
stricted their wells to l per cent of
producing capacity and that the Fed
eral act was being used to regulate
production not in interstate COM
merce.
The recovery act was described as
an unlawful delegation of legislative
power by Congress to the President
and an attempt to vest in the Chief
Executive "the powers of supreme
dictator"
~ Challenging the gold suspension act
of June 3, 1888, Norman declared
payment of 'billions upon billions of
dollars" was involved in the case.
He owned a 81 900 Baltimore &
Ohio Railroad bond containing the
usual clause for payment in gold with
interest at Az per cent, payable semi
annually.
On February l, 1884, he presented
an interest coupon calling for $3.50
in gold. The railroad rendered S22.5O
in currency, but Norman demanded
S38.1O, the amount he said was
equivalent to gold at that time. Lower
courts upheld the act.
Campbell owned 81 bars of gold
bullion when President Roosevelt is
sued his order on April 3, 1888, pro-
hibiting gold boarding.
After he had unsucceSsfully brought
suit to retain the gold, he was indicted
for failure to report his holdings and
for failure to surrender the gold.
- Tried on One Count.
THE Federal District Court in New
York City dismissed the latter count
but ruled he must be tried for not
submitting report. The Second Cir
cult Court of Appeals affirmed this de-
cision.
: In the MacCracken case the Dis
trict of Columbia Court of Appeals
has held the Senate was without
authority to sentence him to 1e days
IN Jail for his action during the air
mail investigation. The lower court
sided with the Senate.
MacCracken, counsel for a number
of aviation companies, and L. H. Brit
tin, former vice president of the
Northwest AirwayS, Inc, were found
guilty by the Senate February IA and
earh Santepced tn IN naVS
Brittin served his term, imposed for
destroying papers the Senate wanted,
but MacCracken made court chal-
lenge of the Senates action.
MacCracken, after being sub
poenaed to appear as witness before
the Airmail Investigating Committee
And to produce certain records, per-
mitted clients to withdraw some Of
fhe documents and destroy others.