anaheim-gazette 1924-08-07

IS WHEELER ANXIOUS TO PROVE HIS "INNOCENCE?" The legal trial of Senator Burton K. Wheeler, Senator LaFollette's running mate on the socialist ticket, on an indictment charging him with accepting pay for attempting to put through the government land office the fraudulent claims of a fraudulent oil company, will be held at Great Falls, Montana, in September, unless Wheeler presses for a postponement of the case. Senator Wheeler has already had a political trial in the United States Senate, where his case was considered by a committee, the majority members of which, in advance of hearing any of the evidence, publicly pronounced the accused man innocent. Witnesses for the defense were first summoned and were examined by Senator Wheeler himself. Witnesses for the prosecution were subjected to hostile examination and the documentary evidence in the case was received only upon demand after long delay. The hearing was a flasco. If Senator Wheeler wishes longer to maintain his claim that he is the victim of a frame up and that he is innocent of the charges made, he will demand trial in September If, as is now intimated, he should urge delay because of campaign engagements, it will be a confession that he is unwilling to have the facts go before the country and to have a decision rendered by a jury. If innocent, the most effective campaigning the socialist candidate for Vice President could do would be to appear in court and secure the verdict of not guilty which would undoubtedly be the result of his trial. If guilty, the natural move for the accused man to make would be to avoid publicity for the facts as they will be brought out in evidence in a real court of justice by Water Works District No. 2. E. E. Thurman was appointed Superintendent of the Orange County Water Works District No. 2. A resolution was adopted in the matter of Road District Improvement No. 29, Resolution of Intention No. 29, fixing August 12, 1924, at the hour of 11 o'clock, as the time for final hearing in said matter. THE DEMOCRATS IN AMERICAN SHIPPING It is wholly amusing to read in the Democratic platform these words: "We declare for an American owned merchant marine, American built and manned by American crews, which is essential for naval security in war and is a protection to the American farmer and manufacturer against excessive ocean freight charges on products of farm and factory." True: but what has the Democratic party, with the exception of a few individuals, done to secure such a desirable result? Ever since 1870, when the first efforts were made by friends of American shipping to promote an Amrican merchant marine, the Democratic party as a party has opposed each and every move. All efforts to secure additional mail for American vessels were opposed by the Democrats. Every effort to promote the building of American vessels to be engaged in the foreign trade has been opposed by the Democratic party. The Democratic party leaders have been for free ships in both the coastwise and foreign trade. There have been a few notable exceptions. As a rule, Democrats of the west have opposed all efforts to promote American shipbuilding for the foreign trade. They have fought all attempts to build up the American shipbuilding industry by a system of pro-quiet investiture that the trust profit of $1500. Then the trust intuitively a little time thysy lawbreak amendable to Another suit General Store up the fradu high grade wiping them w are on the wool has piled was expected investigation Again there It was all de suit has been United States valued at $150 ber of tech least the su deterring thw wools by pa course, duty. Further institutional process the Elk elect a pres as the House would be Failure of tha a majority w send the elec therember there are 44 quired for s stands, and that would b be 23 Republic and 5 La would mean can imagine supporters t or Davis, and the choice o highest cange lege which, ing to have the facts go before the country and to have a decision rendered by a jury. If innocent, the most effective campaigning the socialist candidate for Vice President could do would be to appear in court and secure the verdict of not guilty which would undoubtedly be the result of his trial. If guilty, the natural move for the accused man to make would be to avoid publicity for the facts as they will be brought out in evidence in a real court of justice by "stalling off" the trial. It will be interesting to note how Senator Wheeler meets this situation. Meeting a case in court, where action free from prejudice is certain is a different matter from being "tried" by one's sympathetic colleagues, with the support of a local and national newspaper, plaque anxious to prove his claim of persecution and frame up. Whether or not Senator Wheeler himself is anxious for the opportunity will appear when his willingness or unwillingness to promptly meet the accusation becomes apparent through his next move in the Montana case. Members of the committee which named Senator Wheeler for the vice presidency on the socialist ticket announced that even if Senator Wheeler were convicted it would only be accepted as evidence that he was being persecuted. That depends entirely upon whether the people think a senator should sell his official influence to corrupt clients engaged in trying to put over a crooked oil deal on the government. But members of the committee evidently overlooked the fact that one of the prescribed penalties in case of conviction is permanent exclusion from the right to hold any public office of trust of profit. SUPERVISORS PROCEEDINGS Fumigating licenses were ordered issued to George Ferguson, Ben Aldrich, P. T. Morris, George Edward Spillman, E. L. Wingate, H. R. Sherwood, Henley and Aspelin, Davis Fumigating Company, W. Harrison, P. C. Squire, Frank A. Wilke, B. W. Stark, D. D. Webb, R. E. Coffman, La Habra Citrus Association, Charles Anderson, Hile and Johnson and R. Cresjinp. Spraying licenses were ordered issued to Chester Johnson and L. A. Hile. The chairman was authorized to approve Bond on May 10, 40 vessels to be engaged in the foreign trade has been opposed by the Democratic party. The Democratic party leaders have been for free ships in both the coastwise and foreign trade. There have been a few notable exceptions. As a rule, Democrats of the west have opposed all efforts to promote American ship building for the foreign trade. They have fought all attempts to build up the American ship building industry by a system of protection. The Democratic platform boasts of the fact that "there has been a marked decrease in the volume of American commerce carried in American vessels as compared to the record under a Democratic Administration." What are the facts? From 1870 to 1912 the Democrats opposed every effort to protect and promote American shipping in the foreign trade. When the World War came, the United States found itself without a suitable merchant marine and when it became necessary to enter the war, most of our troops had to be sent over in British ships. To correct this defect in national efficiency the Democratic administration set out on a feverish program of government building and operation of vessels. More than three billion of people's money were squandered by the Democratic administration between 1916 and 1918 in the building of ships. When the war was over, the government found itself with hundreds of poor and half built vessels, which it finally sold (or as many as possible) for a song for junk. The Democratic shipping program was one of the big scandals and flacios of the World war. The wreck was turned over to the Republican administration. It is true that for a time before British shipping recovered from the war, American ships carried a good deal of American imports and exports. When the test came and competition required the aid of the government in some form, the Democrats, or a majority of them in Congress, as sailed the Republican administration in its efforts to save something from the Democratic shipwreck. It requires much assurance for the Democrats in national convention to claim they want an American merchant marine to help the farmers and manufacturers ship their products and wares abroad in American vessels. There are 44 qualified supporters who or Davis, and the choice of highest candidate which candidates make the case and he shares choice is lil dates who votes in that would be, of Who would be the Senate question.State Hughes he cannot be this means coufounded. It is dawnlight similar Follette cancels the will of the vote. If they made by the present hour lucks defeat Representatives a state del Democratic public or one lame d convictions voters in that went to the present Sen have no men that no president.D for La Folletta vote to do majority.As (Democratic)ly result, ascess for La would be to LaFollettathe campaign$5,000,000 and that, by refinement a "par designation," legal necessities.Borah can amounts and and the purity The chairman was authorized to approve Bond on May Tract No. 40 and same was accepted as the official plotting of said tract. The County Auditor was directed to draw a warrant in favor of Malcolm Keith, commander of the American Legion, of Orange county, for $1,000 on the advertising fund to be used for the advertising of Orange county. H. H. Peterson, contractor in Road District Improvement No. 26, was granted an extension of time for ninety days in which to complete his contract. Deed for right of way from C. H. Jeffrey, et al, in the Second Road District was accepted and declared a public highway. The application of Hermina Martínez for state aid was granted. Deed for right of way from Alice S. Leonard, et al, in the Fifth Road District was accepted and declared a public highway. Deed for right of way from Fred W. Poor, et al, in the Second Road District was accepted and declared a public highway. A resolution was adopted in the matter of Road District Improvement No. 3, appointing an engineer to prepare and furnish specifications and accepting plans and specifications. A resolution was passed consummating the sale of property belonging to E. E. Thurman to Orange County. When the test came and competition required the aid of the government in some form, the Democrats, or a majority of them in Congress, as sailed the Republican administration in its efforts to save something from the Democratic shipwreck. It requires much assurance for the Democrats in national convention to claim they want an American merchant marine to help the farmers and manufacturers ship their products and wares abroad in American vessels when that same Democratic party, as a party, has for years thrown stones at every Republican effort to do the same thing. Government (political) ownership and operation of vessels in the carrying trade has proved a failure. The Democrats refuse to assist private capital when the real test comes. WASHINGTON LETTER Harlan Fiske Stone, Mr. Coolidge's attorney general, is putting both ginger and ability into the Department of Justice. Mr. Stone is not a spectacular man. He moves quietly and cautiously but with unflinching determination and compelling force. Without any previous boasting or advertising Mr. Stone has brought suit against the Binder Twine Trust, charging it with being a monopoly and a conspiracy in restraint of trade. It costs the farmers of this country $3,-000,000 a year for binder twine and nothing could be more represensible than a conspiracy to compel them to pay more for this commodity than is just and right. A long list of banks and trust companies are also made defendants in the suit. The Attorney General paid heed to the complaints of the farmers that they were being robbed by the binder trust, conducted... ANAHIM GAZETTE a quiet investigation and discovered that the trust was making an annual profit of $1,800,090 on a capital of $1500. Then he hailed the members of the trust into court. Give Mr. Stone a little time and he will teach wealthy lawbreakers that they are as amendable to the law as anyone else. Another suit instituted by Attorney General Stone is designed to break up the fraudulent practice of importing high grade wools duty free by wrapping them with carpet wools which are on the free list. The tariff on wool has proved less effective than was expected. Mr. Stone started an investigation to ascertain the cause. Again there was no blare of trumpets. It was all done very quietly. But now suit has been entered to forfeit to the United States an importation of wool valued at $1,500,090. There are a number of technicalities involved but at least the suit will have the effect of deterring the smuggling of fine grade wools by packing them inside of course, duty free grades. Further examination of the constitutional provisions to be invoked in case the Electoral College falls to elect a president has revealed that, as the House now stands, such failure would be attended with grave peril. Failure of the electoral college to give a majority to any candidate would send the election to the House. There the members vote by states and as there are 48 states 25 would be required for a majority. As the house stands, and it is the present House that would have to act, there would be 23 Republican votes, 20 Democratic and 5 La Follette votes. This would mean a deadlock, for no one can imagine La Follette releasing his supporters to vote for either Coolidge or Davis, and the constitution limits the choice of the House to the three highest candidates in the electoral college which, of course, would be the United States Board of Tax Appeals, Washington, D.C., and must state the name, residence address and business to the bar, or qualification as a certified public accountant. It shall be accompanied by a certificate of clerk of the court in which the applicant is admitted to practice to the effect that the applicant is a certified public accountant in good standing, duly qualified and entitled to practice in such state or territory. The Board may in its discretion deny admission suspend or disbar any attorney or certified public accountant and shall have the right at any time to inquire under oath into the terms and circumstances of any contract of employment of an attorney or certified public accountant by the taxpayer he represents. Any individual taxpayer or member of a partnership or officer of a corporation may appear for himself or such partnership or corporation upon adequate identification he represents. Any individual taxpayer or member of a partnership or officer of a corporation may appear for himself or such partnership or corporation upon adequate identification to the Board. An appeal shall be initiated by the filing with the Board of a petition which shall contain A caption in substantially the following form: "UNITED STATES BOARD OF TAX APPEALS. Appeal of ___ Taxpayer's Name Docket No.__ Taxpayer's Address. PETITION." Clear and concise assignments of error, alleged by the taxpayer to have been committed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue in determining the tax liability of the petitioner, such assignments of error shall be numbered. A clear and concise statement of the facts upon which the taxpayer relies as constituting the basis of his of the west to promote for the forthought all at american ship system of promium boasts of seen a mark of American record unministration." from 1870 to used every effecte American grade. When the United but a suitable on it became war, most of present over in national administration program and flasThe wreck republican addat for a time recovered ships carried imports and competithe governemocrats, or Congress, as administration nothing fromance for the convention to american merfarmers and products and vessels It is dawning on students of the political situation that a vote for La Follette can mean only tre defeat of the will of the people, of the majority vote. If the choice of President were made by the House it would be the present house, including all the lame lucks defeated in November. As the Representatives can vote only by states a majority of one might sway a state delegation, might compel a Democratic state which had gone Republican or vice versa, by the vote of one lame duck, to vote against the convictions of the majority of the voters in the state. If the election went to the Senate it would be the present Senate and the Senate would have no choice save between two men that no party ever nominated for president, Dawes and Bryan. A vote for La Follette is, therefore clearly a vote to defeat the will of the majority. As the New Work World (Democratic) clearly puts it, "The only result, as we see it, of great success for La Follette and Wheeler would be to paralyze the government. LaFollette managers have now set the campaign fund they hope to raise $5,000,000 and it is further discovered that, by refusing to call their movement a "party," or to employ a party designation, they hope to escape the legal necessity of reporting to the Borah campaign committee the amounts and sources of their receipts and the purpose for which they are required for a majority. As the house stands, and it is the present House that would have to act, there would be 23 Republican votes, 20 Democratic and 5 La Follette votes. This would mean a deadlock, for no one can imagine La Follette releasing his supporters to vote for either Coolidge or Davis, and the constitution limits the choice of the House to the three highest candidates in the electoral college which, of course, would be the candidates named. If the Senate shall make the choice of a vice president and he shall be president, but its choice is limited to the two candidates who have received the highest votes in the electoral college, who would be, of course, Dawes and Bryan. Who would be chief executive while the Senate was making its choice is a question. Some think Secretary of State Hughes. Others contend that he cannot hold over his term. All of this means chaos and confusion worse coufounded. It is dawning on students of the political situation that a vote for La Follette can mean only tre defeat of the will of the people, of the majority vote. If the choice of President were made by the House it would be the present house, including all the lame lucks defeated in November. As the Representatives can vote only by states a majority of one might sway a state delegation, might compel a Democratic state which had gone Republican or vice versa, by the vote of one lame duck, to vote against the convictions of the majority of the voters in the state. If the election went to the Senate it would be the present Senate and the Senate would have no choice save between two men that no party ever nominated for president, Dawes and Bryan. A vote for La Follette is, therefore clearly a vote to defeat the will of the majority. As the New Work World (Democratic) clearly puts it, "The only result, as we see it, of great success for La Follette and Wheeler would be to paralyze the government. LaFollette managers have now set the campaign fund they hope to raise $5,000,000 and it is further discovered that, by refusing to call their movement a "party," or to employ a party designation, they hope to escape the legal necessity of reporting to the Borah campaign committee the amounts and sources of their receipts and the purpose for which they are required for a majority. As the house stands, and it is the present House that would have to act, there would be 23 Republican votes, 20 Democratic and 5 La Follette votes. This would mean a deadlock, for no one can imagine La Follette releasing his supporters to vote for either Coolidge or Davis, and the constitution limits the choice of the House to the three highest candidates in the electoral college which, of course, would be the candidates named. If the Senate shall make the choice of a vice president and he shall be president, but its choice is limited to the two candidates who have received the highest votes in the electoral college who would be, of course, Dawes and Bryan. Who would be chief executive while the Senate was making its choice is a question. Some think Secretary of State Hughes. Others contend that he cannot hold over his term. All of this means chaos and confusion worse coufounded. It is dawning on students of the political situation that a vote for La Follette can mean only tre defeat of the will of the people, of the majority vote. If the choice of President were made by the House it would be the present house, including all the lame lucks defeated in November. As the Representatives can vote only by states a majority of one might sway a state delegation, might compel a Democratic state which had gone Republican or vice versa, by the vote of one lame duck, to vote against the convictions of the majority of the voters in the state. If the election went to the Senate it would be the present Senate and the Senate would have no choice save between two men that no party ever nominated for president, Dawes and Bryan. A vote for La Follette is, therefore clearly a vote to defeat the will of the majority. As the New Work World (Democratic) clearly puts it, "The only result, as we see it, of great success for La Follette and Wheeler would be to paralyze the government. LaFollette managers have now set the campaign fund they hope to raise $5,000,000 and it is further discovered that, by refusing to call their movement a "party," or to employ a party designation, they hope to escape the legal necessity of reporting to the Borah campaign committee the amounts and sources of their receipts and the purpose for which they are required for a majority. As the house stands, and it is the present House that would have to act, there would be 23 Republican votes, 20 Democratic and 5 La Follette votes. This would mean a deadlock, for no one can imagine La Follette releasing his supporters to vote for either Coolidge or Davis, and the constitution limits the choice of the House to the three highest candidates in the electoral college which, of course, would be the candidates named. If the Senate shall make the choice of a vice president and he shall be president, but its choice is limited to the two candidates who have received the highest votes in the electoral college who would be, of course, Dawes and Bryan. Who would be chief executive while the Senate was making its choice is a question. Some think Secretary of State Hughes. Others contend that he cannot hold over his term. All of this means chaos and confusion worse coufounded. It is dawning on students of the political situation that a vote for La Follette can mean only tre defeat of the will of the people, of the majority vote. If the choice of President were made by the House it would be the present house, including all the lame lucks defeated in November. As the Representatives can vote only by states a majority of one might sway a state delegation, might compel a Democratic state which had gone Republican or vice versa, by the vote of one lame duck, to vote against the convictions of the majority of the voters in the state. If the election went to the Senate it would be the present Senate and the Senate would have no choice save between two men that no party ever nominated for president, Dawes and Bryan. A vote for La Follette is, therefore clearly a vote to defeat the will of the majority. As The New Work World (Democratic) clearly puts it, "The only result, as we see it, of great success for La Follette and Wheeler would be to paralyze the government. LaFollette managers have now setthe campaign fund they hope to raise $5,000,000anditisfurtherdiscoveredthatbyrefusingtocalltheirmovementa"party."ortoemployapartydesignation,theyhopetoescapethelegalnecessityofreportingtotheBorahcampaigncommitteetheamountsandsourcesofthereceiptsandthepurposeforwhichtheyarerequiredforamajority.Asthehousestands,anditisthepresentHousethatwouldhavetoact,thewouldbe23Republicanvotes，20Democraticand5LaFollettevotes.Itswouldmeanadeadlock,forsoonecanimagineLafollettereleasinghissupporterstovoteforeitherCoolidgeorDavies,andtheconstitutionlimitsthechoiceoftheHousetothethreehighestcandidatesintheneworalcaleforcewith constitutingthetasisofhisappeal.ThepetitionshallasfaraspossiblebecompleteinitselfsoasfullybutbrieflytoinformtheBoardoftheissuestobepresented.Fiveclearcopiesofthepetitioneitherprintedortypewrittenshallbeononesideofthepaperonly.onpapernotmorethan8incheswide11incheslongandweighingnotlessthan16poundstotheream,foliobase17by22inches,andfastenedonthelest-side.Copiesshallbelegiblebutmaybeonanyweightpaper.Iffrintedtheyshallbein10or12pointtypeongoodunglazedpaper55-8incheswideby9incheslongwithinsidemarginnotlessthanone inch wide,andwithdoubleleadedtextandsingleleadedcitations. Secretary Davis predicts that it willbea10,000,00pluralityforCoolidge,a landslideplusa tidalwave,sо涛speak. Oneoftheworldsadddestsingsisabrightman'sdullfinish. Awellbalancedmandoesnotgoupintheair. NOTICEOFSTOCKHOLDERS'MEETING NOTICEISHEREBYGIVEN,thata special meetingofthestockholdersoftheGoldenStateNationalBank.ofAnabelmCalifornia,acorporation, Atwoo access for La Follette and Wheeler would be to paralyze the government. LaFollette managers have now set the campaign fund they hope to raise $5,000,000 and it is further discovered that, by refusing to call their movement a "party," or to employ a party designation, they hope to escape the legal necessity of reporting to the Borah campaign committee the amounts and sources of their receipts and the purpose for which they are expended. The law applies only to "political parties" and it is on that technicality that La Follette and Wheeler hope to escape its provisions. TAX APPEAL BOARD Rules of practice before the newly constituted United tates Board of Tax Appeals were outlined in instructions received from Washington by the office of Collector of Internal Revenue Rex. B. Goodcell. All appeals made by Southern California taxpayers must conform to the rules laid down by the new body which will decide all tax cases that are appealed from the decision of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. A registartion of persons entitled to practice before the Board will be maintained by the Board in which will be entered the names of all such persons. The following classes of persons may be admitted to practice Attorneys at law who are admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, or the highest court of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia. Certified Public Accountants duly qualified under the law of any State or Territory An application for admission to practice should be addressed to the NOTICE OF STOCKHOLDERS' MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a special meeting of the stockholders of the Golden State National Bank, of Anaheim, California, a corporation, will be held at the office and principal place of business of said corporation, located at its banking rooms at No. 101 East Center Street, in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, on the 14th day of August, 1924, at three o'clock in the afternoon of said day, for the purpose of considering and acting upon the proposition of increasing the number of its Board of Directors from seven to nine, and the transaction of such other business as may properly come before said meeting. By order of the Board of Directors of said corporation. Dated this 12th day of July, 1924. ADOLPH THOMAS, President of said Corporation. E. E. SMITH, Secretary of said Corporation. (CORPORATE SEAL) 7-17-4t BuildingandLoan Fire and Compensation Insurance FRANK TAUSCH 111 N. Los Angeles St OFFICE PHONE 46 RES. 342- Is Five Cents on the Dollar of Valuation too Much to Earn? If a business worth $10,000 earned $500 net income in a year (or $41 a month), would it be considered an unreasonable profit and proof that its prices were too high? The railroads are in that situation today. The 1923 net return for the whole country was less than 5 per cent. As of December 31, 1919, the Interstate Commerce Commission gave to the railroads a tentative valuation of $18,900,000,000. With actual figures for 1920, 1921, 1922, and with 1923 conservatively estimated as $1,100,000,000, there has been invested in the railways since this tentative valuation a net amount of $2,371,583,000, making the value as of December 31, 1923, $21,271,583,000. On this amount the Railways in 1923 earned an aggregate net operating income of approximately $997,610,000, or 4.69 per cent. The Government guarantee of earnings expired August 31, 1920. If this guarantee had been continued—as repeatedly but erroneously claimed—the Government would owe the railroads more than a billion dollars. Last year the roads handled a record volume of business but could not earn the fair return of 5% per cent to which the Interstate Commerce Commission, under the Transportation Act, has found they are entitled: If the roads cannot earn 5% per cent in a big year, what will they do in a small year? The Transportation Act provides that if a road in any year earns more than 6 per cent it shall pay one-half of the excess to the Government. The Act is, therefore, a limitation rather than a guarantee. GIVE TRANSPORTATION ACT FAIR TRIAL The Transportation Act should be given a fair test and its merits judged by the results of a normal period of reasonable length. The year 1923 was the first since the war under conditions approaching stabilization. What the railroad situation demands just now is not more law but more confidence. The railroads have emerged from the welter of the war, restored their morale, made enormous investments of new money, and in 1923 handled a peak business with universal satisfaction. The Transportation Act provides that if a road in any year earns more than 6 per cent it shall pay one-half of the excess to the Government. The Act is, therefore, a limitation rather than a guarantee. GIVE TRANSPORTATION ACT FAIR TRIAL The Transportation Act should be given a fair test and its merits judged by the results of a normal period of reasonable length. The year 1923 was the first since the war under conditions approaching stabilization. What the railroad situation demands just now is not more law but more confidence. The railroads have emerged from the welter of the war, restored their morale, made enormous investments of new money, and in 1923 handled a peak business with universal satisfaction. The Transportation Act is the only really constructive railroad legislation of a generation. Previous acts were almost solely repressive. In framing the Act the public interest was paramount. The Act directs the Interstate Commerce Commission to "give due consideration to the transportation needs of the country and the necessity of enlarging railway facilities in order to provide the people of the United States with adequate transportation." Give the Act a chance. Don't amend it. If the roads are let alone they should make as good a record for efficiency this year as last. Constructive suggestions are always welcome. C. R. GRAY President. Omaha, Nebraska. April 1, 1924. UNION PACIFIC SYSTEM Atwood Home Tract A Beautiful New Development of Richfield Richfield main line S. F. Railroad, two main artery boulevards, arter acre tracts, gas, lights, water and streets. Adjat to $100,000 graded school, store, shops, garage, etc. tor transit service, good train service to Los Angeles other cities. All prices far below real value. Seeing is believing. at one of our agents to show you this property E. WAGNER N. Los Angeles St. Phone 368, Anaheim C. E. McFADDEN Phone 25 W Placentia