proval of the court.

"There is no corruption in this case as to any officers of the government except Albert B. Fall. It has been the theory of the government that former Secretary Fall received from Harry F. Sinclair, organizer and owner of the Mammoth company, a pecuniary consideration which influenced him to grant the company a lease for Teapot Dome. Counsel for the United States charged that Sinclair received as dividends from the Continental Trading Company, Ltd., of Ontario, Canada, $230,-500 face value of liberty bonds which he turned over to Fall as a bribe. This charge is as grave and serious an accusation as could be made against a public official, augmented by the fact that this official so cahrged was in a sense the trustee for the people of the United States of its public lands.

"The case is one, therefore, in which not only the rights of the United States and the Mammoth Oil company, but likewise the rights of the public at large are involved.

"The entire transaction is tainted with favoritism, collusion and corruption, defeating the proper and lawful functions of the government. Nothing is so essential to the perpetuity of representative government as fidelity of public officials.

The opinion also states "that is ot vital importance that government oil in naval reserve lands should not be drained away for the benefit of private enterprises, but that it shall be preserved in the interest of the national defense. The appelate court listed 64 exceptions to findings of the lower court as set out by special prosecutors Romerene and Roberts in three groups, as follows:

"First, was there authority of law to make the lease o fApril 7, 1922 and a supplemental agreement on February 9, 1923 to the Mammoth Oil company and were they in accordance with the law?

"Second, were the lease and agreement procured by fraud as claimed by the government?

"Third, was there abuse of discretion in not granting continuances asked by the government to secure certain evidence of H. S. Osler, and important witness, who was in Canada and in reusing to re-open the case for this evidence?"

Discussing the law pertaining to naval oil reserves, the decision set out, "as congress deemed the law, 1t intended to place the matter entirely in the hands of the secretary of the navy. * * * Whether the idea of placing the naval reserve control in the department of the interior originated with Secretary Denby or was suggested to him by Secretary Fall, is a matter of conjecture. It is certain that Secretary Fall was not only willing, but anxious that such suggestion of Secretary Denby be carried out."

Continuing with advice of the arrangements for the leasing of the lands the document says:

"This arrangements was ratified by Secretary Fall in a letter of October 30, 1921. Secretary Denby seemed to have so little information concerning the leasing of Teapot Dome that Secretary Fall thought it necessary to write him a long letter of date April 12, 1922, explaining the same. * * * that Secretary Fall as to this matter, dominated Secretary Denby, Admiral Robinson and other government officers, and practically controlled the action of the navy department as to the leasing of Teapot Dome is a conclusion difficult to escape under this record."

proval of the court.

"There is no corruption in this case as to any officers of the government except Albert B. Fall. It has been the theory of the government that former Secretary Fall received from Harry F. Sinclair, organizer and owner of the Mammoth company, a pecuniary consideration which influenced him to grant the company a lease for Teapot Dome. Counsel for the United States charged that Sinclair received as dividends from the Continental Trading Company, Ltd., of Ontario, Canada, $230,-500 face value of liberty bonds which he turned over to Fall as a bribe. This charge is as grave and serious an accusation as could be made against a public official, augmented by the fact that this official so cahrged was in a sense the trustee for the people of the United States of its public lands.

"The case is one, therefore, in which not only the rights of the United States and the Mammoth Oil company, but likewise the rights of the public at large are involved.

"The entire transaction is tainted with favoritism, collusion and corruption, defeating the proper and lawful functions of the government. Nothing is so essential to the perpetuity of representative government as fidelity of public officials.

The opinion also states "that is ot vital importance that government oil in naval reserve lands should not be drained away for the benefit of private enterprises, but that it shall be preserved in the interest of the national defense. The appelate court listed 64 exceptions to findings of the lower court as set out by special prosecutors Romerene and Roberts in three groups, as follows:

"First, was there authority of law to make the lease o fApril 7, 1922 and a supplemental agreement on February 9, 1923 to the Mammoth Oil company and were they in accordance with the law?

"Second, were the lease and agreement procured by fraud as claimed by the government?

"Third, was there abuse of discretion in not granting continuances asked by the government to secure certain evidence of H. S. Osler, and important witness, who was in Canada and in reusing to re-open the case for this evidence?"

Discussing the law pertaining to naval oil reserves, the decision set out, "as congress deemed the law, 1t intended to place the matter entirely in the hands of the secretary of the navy. * * * Whether the idea of placing the naval reserve control in the department of the interior originated with Secretary Denby or was suggested to him by Secretary Fall, is a matter of conjecture. It is certain that Secretary Fall was not only willing, but anxious that such suggestion of Secretary Denby be carried out."

Continuing with advice of the arrangements for the leasing of the lands the document says:

"This arrangements was ratified by Secretary Fall in a letter of October 30, 1921. Secretary Denby seemed to have so little information concerning the leasing of Teapot Dome that Secretary Fall thought it necessary to write him a long letter of date April 12, 1922, explaining the same. * * * that Secretary Fall as to this matter, dominated Secretary Denby, Admiral Robinson and other government officers, and practically controlled the action of the navy department as to the leasing of Teapot Dome is a conclusion difficult to escape under this record."

proval of the court.

"There is no corruption in this case as to any officers of the government except Albert B. Fall. It has been the theory of the government that former Secretary Fall received from Harry F. Sinclair, organizer and owner of the Mammoth company, a pecuniary consideration which influenced him to grant the company a lease for Teapot Dome. Counsel for the United States charged that Sinclair received as dividends from the Continental Trading Company, Ltd., of Ontario, Canada, $230,-500 face value of liberty bonds which he turned over to Fall as a bribe. This charge is as grave and serious an accusation as could be made against a public official, augmented by the fact that this official so cahrged was in a sense the trustee for the people of the United States of its public lands.

"The case is one, therefore, in which not only the rights of the United States and the Mammoth Oil company, but likewise the rights of the public at large are involved.

"The entire transaction is tainted with favoritism, collusion and corruption, defeating the proper and lawful functions of the government. Nothing is so essential to the perpetuity of representative government as fidelity of public officials.

The opinion also states "that is ot vital importance that government oil in naval reserve lands should not be drained away for the benefit of private enterprises, but that it shall be preserved in the interest of the national defense. The appelate court listed 64 exceptions to findings of the lower court as set out by special prosecutors Romerene and Roberts in three groups, as follows:

"First, was there authority of law to make the lease o fApril 7, 1922 and a supplemental agreement on February 9, 1923 to the Mammoth Oil company and were they in accordance with the law?

"Second, were the lease and agreement procured by fraud as claimed by the government?

"Third, was there abuse of discretion in not granting continuances asked by the government to secure certain evidence of H. S. Osler, and important witness, who was in Canada and in reusing to re-open the case for this evidence?"

Discussing the law pertaining to naval oil reserves, the decision set out, "as congress deemed the law, 1t intended to place the matter entirely in the hands of the secretary of the navy. * * * Whether the idea of placing the naval reserve control in the department of the interior originated with Secretary Denby or was suggested to him by Secretary Fall, is a matter of conjecture. It is certain that Secretary Fall was not only willing, but anxious that such suggestion of Secretary Denby be carried out."

Continuing with advice of the arrangements for the leasing of the lands the document says:

"This arrangements was ratified by Secretary Fall in a letter of October 30, 1921. Secretary Denby seemed to have so little information concerning the leasing of Teapot Dome that Secretary Fall thought it necessary to write him a long letter of date April 12, 1922, explaining the same. * * * that Secretary Fall as to this matter, dominated Secretary Denby, Admiral Robinson and other government officers, and practically controlled the action of the navy department as to the leasing of Teapot Dome is a conclusion difficult to escape under this record."

proval of the court.

"There is no corruption in this case as to any officers of the government except Albert B. Fall. It has been the theory of the government that former Secretary Fall received from Harry F. Sinclair, organizer and owner of the Mammoth company, a pecuniary consideration which influenced him to grant the company a lease for Teapot Dome. Counsel for the United States charged that Sinclair received as dividends from the Continental Trading Company, Ltd., of Ontario, Canada, $230,-500 face value of liberty bonds which he turned over to Fall as a bribe. This charge is as grave and serious an accusation as could be made against a public official, augmented by the fact that this official so cahrged was in a sense the trustee for the people of the United States of its public lands.

"The case is one, therefore, in which not only the rights of the United States and the Mammoth Oil company, but likewise the rights of the public at large are involved.

"The entire transaction is tainted with favoritism, collusion and corruption, defeating the proper and lawful functions of the government. Nothing is so essential to the perpetuity of representative government as fidelity of public officials.

The opinion also states "that is ot vital importance that government oil in naval reserve lands should not be drained away for the benefit of private enterprises, but that it shall be preserved in the interest of the national defense. The appelate court listed 64 exceptions to findings of the lower court as set out by special prosecutors Romerene and Roberts in three groups, as follows:

"First, was there authority of law to make the lease o fApril 7, 1922 and a supplemental agreement on February 9, 1923 to the Mammoth Oil company and were they in accordance with the law?

"Second, were the lease and agreement procured by fraud as claimed by the government?

"Third, was there abuse of discretion in not granting continuances asked by the government to secure certain evidence of H. S. Osler, and important witness, who was in Canada and in reusing to re-open the case for this evidence?"

Discussing the law pertaining to naval oil reserves, the decision set out, "as congress deemed the law, 1t intended to place the matter entirely in the hands of the secretary of the navy. * * * Whether the idea of placing the naval reserve control in the department of the interior originated with Secretary Denby or was suggested to him by Secretary Fall, is a matter of conjecture. It is certain that Secretary Fall was not only willing, but anxious that such suggestion of Secretary Denby be carried out."

Continuing with advice of the arrangements for the leasing of the lands the document says:

"This arrangements was ratified by Secretary Fall in a letter of October 30, 1921. Secretary Denby seemed to have so little information concerning the leasing of Teapot Dome that Secretary Fall thought it necessary to write him a long letter of date April 12, 1922, explaining the same. * * * that Secretary Fall as to this matter, dominated Secretary Denby, Admiral Robinson and other government officers, and practically controlled the action of the navy department as to the leasing of Teapot Dome is a conclusion difficult to escape under this record."

proval of the court.

"There is no corruption in this case as to any officers of the government except Albert B. Fall. It has been the theory of the government that former Secretary Fall received from Harry F. Sinclair, organizer and owner of the Mammoth company, a pecuniary consideration which influenced him to grant the company a lease for Teapot Dome. Counsel for the United States charged that Sinclair received as dividends from the Continental Trading Company, Ltd., of Ontario, Canada, $230,-500 face value of liberty bonds which he turned over to Fall as a bribe. This charge is as grave and serious an accusation as could be made against a public official, augmented by the fact that this official so cahrged was in a sense the trustee for the people of the United States of its public lands.

"The case is one, therefore, in which not only the rights of the United States and the Mammoth Oil company, but likewise the rights of the public at large are involved.

"The entire transaction is tainted with favoritism, collusion and corruption, defeating the proper and lawful functions of the government. Nothing is so essential to the perpetuity of representative government as fidelity of public officials.

The opinion also states "that is ot vital importance that government oil in naval reserve lands should not be drained away for the benefit of private enterprises, but that it shall be preserved in the interest of the national defense. The appelate court listed 64 exceptions to findings of the lower court as set out by special prosecutors Romerene and Roberts in three groups, as follows:

"First, was there authority of law to make the lease o fApril 7, 1922 and a supplemental agreement on February 9, 1923 to the Mammoth Oil company and were they in accordance with the law?

"Second, were the lease and agreement procured by fraud as claimed by the government?

"Third, was there abuse of discretion in not granting continuances asked by the government to secure certain evidence of H. S. Osler, and important witness, who was in Canada and in reusing to re-open the case for this evidence?"

Discussing the law pertaining to naval oil reserves, the decision set out, "as congress deemed the law, 1t intended to place the matter entirely in the hands of the secretary of the navy. * * * Whether the idea of placing the naval reserve control in the department of the interior originated with Secretary Denby or was suggested to him by Secretary Fall, is a matter of conjecture. It is certain that Secretary Fall was not only willing, but anxious that such suggestion of Secretary Denby be carried out."

Continuing with advice of the arrangements for the leasing of the lands the document says:

"This arrangements was ratified by Secretary Fall in a letter of October 30, 1921. Secretary Denby seemed to have so little information concerning the leasing of Teapot Dome that Secretary Fall thought it necessary to write him a long letter of date April 12, 1922, explaining the same. * * * that Secretary Fall as to this matter, dominated Secretary Denby, Admiral Robinson and other government officers, and practically controlled the action of the navy department as to the leasing of Teapot Dome is a conclusion difficult to escape under this record."