Commercial Trust Co of New Jursey v. Miller
Decision Date | 10 April 1923 |
Docket Number | No. 575,575 |
Citation | 43 S.Ct. 486,262 U.S. 51,67 L.Ed. 858 |
Parties | COMMERCIAL TRUST CO. OF NEW JURSEY v. MILLER, Alien Property Custodian |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Mr. Selden Bacon, of New York City, for appellant.
Mr. James A. Fowler, of Knoxville, Tenn., for appellee.
This is a suit under the Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, and the amendment of November 4, 1918, 40 Stat. 411, 1020 (Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 3115 1/2 a et seq.). It was commenced by Francis P. Garvan as Alien Property Custodian. He ceasing to be such, Thomas W. Miller was appointed his successor, and substituted as petitioner.
Section 7 of the act provides that, 'if the President shall so require, any money or other property * * * held for the benefit of an enemy,' without license 'which the Prsident after investigation shall determine * * * is so held, shall be conveyed, transported, assigned, delivered, or paid over to the alien property custodian.'
The act has received exposition in Central Trust Co. v. Garvan, 254 U. S. 554, 41 Sup. Ct. 214, 65 L. Ed. 403, and Stoehr v. Wallace, 255 U. S. 239, 41 Sup. Ct. 293, 65 L. Ed. 604, and what it authorizes, and the conditions of the exercise of its authorization determined.
Whatever problems the act presents those cases resolve. They decide that the President's power may, under section 51 of the act (Comp. St. 1918, Comp. St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 3115 1/2 c), be delegated to and be exercised by the Custodian, and that the determination of the Custodian is conclusive whether right or wrong. And it may be exercised by forcible seizure of the property or by suit and, if by suit, the suit is purely possessory and must be yielded to; the right of any claimant being postponed to subsequent assertion. And it was decided that the Custodian acquires by suit In other words, and in comprehensive description, the act may be denominated an exercise of governmental power in the emergency of war and its procedure is accommodated to and made adequate to its purpose, but securing as well, the assertion of opposing or countervailing rights 'by a suit in equity unembarrassed by the President's executive determination,' and if the claimant 'prevails' the property 'is to be forthwith returned to him.'
These are the determining generalities, and the Circuit Court of Appeals applying them, affirmed the decree of the District Court, adjudging, ordering and decreeing that the Commercial Trust Company of New Jersey 'do forthwith convey, transfer, assign, deliver and pay to Thomas W. Miller, as Alien Property Custodian, all of the money and other property held by it under a certain trust agreement entered into on January 30, 1913,' between the company and Frederick Wesche and Helene J. von Schierholz. A list of the moneys and other property was attached to the decree.
It was recited in the trust agreement that the property which consisted of bonds, was held 'for the joint account of said Frederick Wesche and Helene J. von Schierholz, and to collect the interest to become due and payable on said bonds' for their joint account, and to deliver the bonds from time to time as requested, to either 'or to the survivor of them, it being understood that the said bonds and the said interest money to be collected thereon are to be held and collected and delivered or paid over to either the said Frederick Wesche or to the said Helene J. von Schierholz, or to the survivor of them.'
In addition to the above, the following may be quoted from the opinion of the Circuit Court of Appeals:
'The Trust Company, in compliance with the provisions of the act, made a report in December, 1917, that it held stocks, bonds, mortgages, securities and money, of the value of about $600,000, in trust, as to both principal and interest, for the joint account of Frederick Wesche, of Paris, France, and Helene J. vo Schierholz, of Plaue, Germany, to be delivered and paid to either upon his or her sole demand, or to the survivor.
The court answered the Custodian by virtue of his power under the act and the efficacy of its exercise. This appeal disputes the answer, and the contention is that the power was not exercised as required because the Custodian had not made an investigation which justified in any way 'any determination that the property was all (italics counsel's) enemy property, or seizure of all (it...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
US Shoe Corp. v. US
... ... Cohen, Director, Jeanne E. Davidson, Assistant Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice ... the Tax, Congress concurrently established the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, 26 U.S.C. § 9505 (1988 & Supp. V 1993) hereinafter "Trust Fund", to ... ...
-
Scholle v. Hare
...the courts have characterized as 'political,' questions relating to the termination of wars, Commercial Trust Co. of New Jersey v. Miller, 1925, 262 U.S. 51, 43 S.Ct. 486, 67 L.Ed. 858, and what constitutes a republican form of government, such as adoption of the initiative and referendum, ......
-
Flast v. Cohen
...effectively with 'huge litigations' and 'redundant actions.' 271 F.Supp., at 17. 10. See, e.g., Commercial Trust Co. of New Jersey v. Miller, 262 U.S. 51, 43 S.Ct. 486, 67 L.Ed. 858 (1923); Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1, 12 L.Ed. 581 (1849). 11. See, e.g., United States v. Fruehauf, 365 U.S. 1......
-
Antolok v. U.S.
... ... designating the United States as "administering authority" over a trust territory comprised of the Marshall Islands, the Mariana Islands, and the ... Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure, Sec. 3654, at 186 (2d ... of duration of hostilities and related war powers legislation, Commercial ... Page 380 ... Trust Co. v. Miller, 262 U.S. 51, 43 S.Ct. 486, 67 ... ...
-
THE PEACE POWERS: HOW TO END A WAR.
...concluded to the usual political agencies of the Government."). (226) Id. at 167-69. (227) Id.; see also Com. Tr. Co. of N.J. v. Miller, 262 U.S. 51, 57 (1923) ("[TJhe power which declared the necessity [of passing the wartime statute] is the power to declare its cessation, and what the ces......
-
Asymmetric World Jurisprudence
...to a case and mean "not in this instance but perhaps later if the times warrant it." 60. See, e.g., Commercial Trust Co. v. Miller, 262 U.S. 51 (1923) (leaving to the political branches the issue of when war begins and ends); Oetjen v. Cent. Leather Co., 246 U.S. 297 61. See, e.g., Nixon v.......