There was a new judge. There was a new jury. There was a certain amount of new evidence. But it was the same old casethe U. S. v. Oilman Harry Ford Sinclair for alleged conspiracy to defraud.
The same old Teapot Dome hung upon legal pothooks. The same old stories were expected from the defense: how, in 1921, the Navy Department wanted oil storage tanks in case of War; how, in 1922, Oilman Sinclair took the Teapot Dome lease for "patriotic" as well as private reasons; how he invested in Liberty Bonds for...
To continue reading:
or
Log-In
