The Washington times., 1935-06-29

|$]S""' Roosevelt, haV.
Lewis Haney ing induce d
Congress to repudiate the gold
clause in our bonds and notes, now
demands that Congress shall deny
the use of the courts to the holders
of bonds or notes.
This is a double reputation.
First he repudiateS a promise.
Then he repudiates the rights of
promises to sue in court.
Mr.. Roosevelt gets behind the
doctrine that sovereign may
refuse to be sued. But the
Supreme Court recently said the
following wise words: "The fact
that the United States may not
be sued without its consent is
a matter of procedure which
does not affect the legal and
binding character of its con-
tracts. The cOntractual obi
CATION remains binding upon
the conscience of the sovereign"
After all, there is such a thing
as plain honesty.
Mr.. Roosevelt argues that our
gold clause bonds have been
quoted no higher than others. OF
course not! When people know
that he will refuse to pay in gold,
and will fall back on "the sover-
eign's" right to dodge suit, the
gold clause means nothing. Such
an argument is childish.
Mr.. Roosevelt goes on to imply
by innuendo that the holders of
gold bonds and notes are seeking
enrichment" not recovery of
loss. In this connection, he mis-
uses the words of the court.
When Perry sued on his gold
bond, he sued for breach of con-
tract, not for enrichment. The
court merely said that las a rem
edy for breach, plaintiff can re-
cover no more than the loss he
has suffered and of which he
may rightfully complain. He is
not entitled to be enriched"
1 doubt if the judges in their
hearts are proud of this reason
ing, but even so it gives no basis
for Mr.. Roosevelt'S claim that
holders of gold bonds and notes
are now seeking "enrichment," or
fN
Mr.. Roosevelt's argument about
treating all equally, and paying
dollar for dollar" is thoroughly
illogical. The words are fine. The
meaning isn't.
The only question of equality is
one concerning contracts. These
bonds are contracts to pay. They
are not dollars. Furthermore,
they are contracts to pay speci'
fled kind of dollar. They are,
therefore. different from other
bonds. What sense is there in
prating about equality?
If 1 promise to pay you a hog,
can I then pay you silver (aC
$1.29 an ounce just because 1
am paying OIL RS that way?
The only way to treat Govern
ment security holders equally"
is to treat them according to the
promises in the different Sc
curities.
The message is full Of venom.
He alleges that 'litigious per.
sons" or "a handful of private
litigants" are seeking to exploit
the general public in the hope of
a wholly speculative private
profit" Il know of no evidence
to support this allegation.)
Most serious of all, however,
is his attitude toward the
courts. He says that the courts
are not for the purpose of en-.
abling ga few to haraSS and
embarraSS sovereign action by
the Government" He says that
the Government cannot and will
not allow the use of "itS" courts
to sabotage" its operations!
There is dictatorship for you.
The sovereign issues an edict
which he says is for the benefit
of all. Then he closes "his"
courts to any suit against him!
In conclusion, one little queS.
ton: Why does Mr.. Roosevelt pay
Panama in gold? Are the people
of Panama anv better or less "liti.