xt7msb3wtd0h_13 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7msb3wtd0h/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7msb3wtd0h/data/72m2.dao.xml unknown 166 Cubic Feet 381 document boxes, seven textile items, three map folders, one artwork archival material 72m2 English University of Kentucky The physical rights to the materials in this collection are held by the University of Kentucky Special Collections Research Center.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Frederick Moore Vinson papers Economic stabilization. Elections -- United States -- Congresses. Judges -- Correspondence. Judges -- United States. Judicial opinions Judicial process -- United States Legislators -- Correspondence. New Deal, 1933-1939. World War, 1914-1918 -- Veterans. World War, 1939-1945. Chief Justice - Blanton, Ward M text Chief Justice - Blanton, Ward M 2019 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7msb3wtd0h/data/72m2/Box_162/Folder_11/Multipage1630.pdf 1951-1953 1953 1951-1953 section false xt7msb3wtd0h_13 xt7msb3wtd0h J.


,4“? 1’1"







 No.6—824 E.ningston ave
Charlotte,North Carolina
December 3,1951

Hon.Fred M Vinson, Chief Justice

Dear Mr.Chief Justice:- RE:281 Civil-U.s.Dist.Ct.Nestern N.C.

Whe President on November 16,1951, forced by resignation
frOm Federal Service Theron Lamar Caudle thereby bringing to an
end his nefarious and illegal activvities extending back through

years. Immediately the controversy broke before the House Comm—
1 ice his former ally and goon Frank N.Littlejohn of Charlotte
rushed into print to say that Gaudle had requested the prosecution
of Blanton in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County.

audle and Littlejohn and others conspired to frame the
writer in the state Court to cover up the frauds perpetrated in
Civil action 281 in the Federal Court ageinst the plaintiff by


the purported court and un—authorized attorney‘s and Judges.

There is a little matter of a forged Mandate of the

Fourth Ciieuit Court and unauthorized court orders on file in

the office of the Clerk of the local district court. The records
are replete with proof that no duly authorized and qualified
Judge, or duly admitted attorney for defendants,ever presided or
apueered in the cause. Caudie and Littlejohn conspired to ob~
strtot Justice in the l“ecleral Court and to deny the plaintiff
equal justice in accordance With the laws of the Unitedstates.

Judge Wilson Narlick has been interviewed and has advised
the attorney who interviewed him he could and would take the
matter up if properly brought before him by having the orders
of Judge Raul vacated. The records conclusively show that there
is no eeidence that eicher Judge E.Y.webb or Judge Jothaul had
ever tauen the oaths prescribed by law atthe time they presumed
to preside in the cazse.

I have been thrice interviewed by Government agents in
the past weeks re this matter. It has been.suggested I write you
requesting that you personally bring about a satisfactory ad-
justment of the situation,thereby,obviating the necessity of
filin~ complaints with other branches of the Government in View
of the fact that you are in charge of and responsible for the
Fourth Circuit district.

May I have a word from you at your earliest convenience.

Res ctfully yours


Jard M Blanton


 ‘ December. 14; .1951

Mr. Ward M. Blanton,
6-824 E. Kingston Avenue,
Charlotte. North Carolina.

Dear Mr. Blanton:

_ I have your letter of recent date relative to a civil
action in the North Carolina Diatrict Court. in which you
we re the plaintiff.

. I have transmitted your letter to Judge John J. Parker.
Chief Judge. United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit. Charlotte. North Carolina, for his consideration and

. attention.

V Very truly yours,

{signed}; Eyed 1L. Eli-12.501"! '





I" fair!” I


December 14, 1951

Honorable John J. Parker.

Chief Judge.

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fourth Circuit,

C_ tierlotte, North Carolina. ,

Dear Judge Parker:

I am enclosing herewith copy of a letter which I have
received from Mr. Ward M. Blanton. together within copy
of my reply in which I informed Mr. Blanton‘ I would forward
his letter to you for your attention and consideration.

With kind regards.

Since rely,

(Signedl Eged M.. Eingon

 Qflnfleh flutes; (flirtuit Glnnrt of Meals
Email} Euhisial flit-wit

CHAMazns or


6-82h E. Kingston Avenue.
Charlotte. North Carolina.

Dear Mr. Blanton:

Your letter of December 3. 1951.
addressed to Chief Justice Vinson. has been referred
bi Chief Judge John J. Parker to me. I have con-

3 dered it and find that it does not relate to any
nding action in the District Court of North Caro-
ina or in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Ju-
dicial Circuit; nor does the letter constitute a
complaint filed in due_eourse in either of these
courts. There is. therefore. no action which
the Court of Appeals can take in the premises.

Very truly yours.

United States Circuit Judge.

 Mniteh fitatez (Emmi mi gppzalfi

gfi'uurfl} flubicial (flirmif



11% ‘UEE L'L

, , ”WE“
p‘JY _' 4::0

infiv 09

diréuit Juflw




December 17, 195

Hon. Fred 2. Vinson,
Chief Justice of the United States,
Washington 13, D. C.

Dear Mr. Chief Justice: “- Letter of 1r. hard H. Blanton.

I am in receipt of y rletter of December lb enclosing

copy of letter of Mr. hard 11 lanton of December 3 and COpy of
your letter in reply thereto. While the case of Blanton v. Pacific
Mutual Life Ins. 00., which is the case referred to in Mr.
Blanton' 5 letter, Jas pending in the District Court he wrote me

aletter stating that he had oeen informed that I had said that
he was insane and that his case was without merit and stating that
he wished to come to see me and talk about his case. I wrote him
that I knew nothing about his mental condition, except as it had
been evideHCed by groundless attacks upon the courts and judicial
officers, but that, in ViOW'Ol his tter, I intended to have
nothinE to do with his case and would1 not sit in the he =ar1ng 01 it
OI desi gnate a jud:e to hear it, but Jould ask the judge next in
order 01 sen:1.ority to make the des mation. Shortly af uer this Judge
Jebb entered an order disqualifying himself to hear the case and
asking that another judge be designated to hear it, and I entered
an order statring that fe elt that I should enter no orders in the
cake and requesting Tudg e So oper to make the designationa Judge Boner
designated Judge l‘aul. '


In View Of the action taken at that time, I am referring
your letter with enclosures to Judge 50per for his attention and

With hifih nersonal regards, I am


Re eSpm mf ally yours,

9/ £72.; a wait-4 - 1:11 -»

v‘JP/ B

C0py to
Mon. Morris A. 50per,
U.S.Circuit Judge,
Baltimore, Ed.

Mr. Ward “ Blanton,
hd) ".1013 51?, 1.1.0.




December 1?,

Hon. Fred Kc Vinson,
Chief Justice of the United States,
hashington 13, 7. C.

Dear Mr. Chief Justice:

Supqlementing my letter relative to
Ward J. Blanton, I am enclosing herewith copy of a
letter which I wrote Chief Justice atone in l9hh in
reSponse to an inquiry enclosing a letter from Blantona
Judge Paul wrote a lengthy opinion in the caSe which
you will find reported in h Federal Rules Decisions
200. An appeal was taken from the order entered on this
Opinion but the appeal was Lismissed as premature
but the Court of Appeals said there was no error in
the order. See lhé F. 2d 725. Final order was mtered
on appeal. I enclose herewith copy of the mandate which
contains copy of the order affirmed.

I thought you would like to have this
information with regard to the case.

ReSpectfully yours,

v, ‘ f .1 ‘ 1
any I; a
. .
2 h



 saptmr 16, 19“.

Ron. mm: 1". Stone,
Chief Justice of the: muted states,
mmingm, D. 3.

Dear Ir. Chin: mum:

x have Just remand to my arm.“- and; find
your letter of summer 6th attaining the letter or up.
and it. Blanton, much I an remains herewith.

in. Bhutan has mumm a suit. against 3
111's Manon am in aha Unit“! States District: Court in
Charlotte asking damages for Man imam: and
oonapiraoy 1n communism with. his cm in an insane
asylum am yam ago. A am 90.11: m 1:181:1th by
bill against the am company in m mum metric: of
Wane, so 3: an m: and, when 3mg m sumac).
for the 49m, he and with 0W a pacifist: for
tho mom of. Mao firm. which cm to naught.

M30 my“ command a pretrial hunting in we
can» pending in the Eastern District: at Earth Carolina in
the Spring of 1943, when I ”sigma bin to hold a spoon-1
tom of court in that District; and when he: named a
putrid. m to tho effect: that: certain 95mm of nation
are m by anathema” Bhutan ram all affidavit of
his: and mindin- nnt- hm ant! ha ath_ the can to
be have. by me m: b.

After a. cause lad bun at Lam for months
and arm tho can had been mm by Judge my“ on profit“,
Bhutan mod boron Judas Robb for : Gama: Jungian:
ugh-tarmac mmmtmmermm
t 106 in this. m Mg. Babb denied tho nation, annual:
{1106 a petition with some” that ha: by mm.

but new In no“ an an insulting loam
wanting tantalum Mum um: I hid said an: h-
!“ 1mm and that his one was without wit and. stating
I note 311: that I lam! nothing «hm 123.: noun: amazon.
except as 1h 1m bean Wood. by growls-a mum upon the
courts and Molt}. atrial-s, but that. in an at his

 chief Jhettoe atone ---#2--Bopt. 16, um.

letter, I: intended to have nothing to at) with hie one and
would not ext 1:: the hoenin o: it; or deemte a Junie to
hear it, but would oak the We next in order of non witty
to make the designation: Shortly attor- thie Mae Webb
entered en order :13.ng himself to m the one

end eekang that another Judge be oeoigneted to hear 1t.‘ and
I entered an order stating that I felt that I should enter
no orders in the case and Mounting Judge $0903 to make
the animation. Mae Sopoz' deeimtea Judge Paul?

may upon his denignotion Judge Paul «not:
the motions in the oeeo for hearing and passed upon all of
then, noting forth the taste in a morally prep-area opinion.
Bhutan appealed tron the order denying his motion to the
ctrcuit Court of Appeals. where the appeal.» now pending.
Reoontly he node n notion in the own, too moment by
default on the wound that the attorney who, signed the uneven
one not em to have been admitted to motioe' in the District
002?; but I understand this Judge Paul has denied thin
” We

,, This cover: in brief the history 9!“ this litigio-
tun, exoept that 1 would an that Bhutan hoe Massed

the Depot clerk or the Court to at Charlotte with complain“
end three e an to that he intends: to do to m: Judges.
Shortly after the unit one instituted he requested the

united states Attorney to rate the defendant investigated

by the P. 3. 32.3 and, when the Attorney rem-ed to do this,

he filed complaint with tho Department or Juntaoe asking that
he he removed tron atria. - .

1 tool. that something want to be done about the
my that Bhutto: has carried on; but I may how what
to do. A. ymeoutim for contracting notice or for ”atom:
of court night be proper: but I have reeling thet his
conduct 1- more properly ettumteble to his mental. condition
than to an intent to violate the lee. My oonoluexon hoe,
been thet the but mat.) do wee to 1mm hie critieim
out: “32:” but I be glad to have your view- about

‘ e

1 en looking rm wzth moh leeenre to eee:
you on the 96th, P as

With higheet "was and heat wishes. I on
Keepeotrun: you“.

 V Endorsed:
ELELEiiE "Filed

Dec 1 1

1 rk V.S.Dist Court"

To the Honorable Judge of the District
Court of the United States for the hestern
District of North Carolina.


WHEREAS, lately in the District Court of the United States for the
Western District of North Carolina, before you or some of you, in a cause
between Ward M. Blanton, Plaintiff, and Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company
and J. E. Garland, Defendants; Civil Action No. 281; wherein the judgment
of the said District Court, entered in the said cause on the 9th day of April,
l9h5, and the order of the said District Court, entered in the said cause on
the lst day of May, 19b5, are in the words following, to—wit:

J U‘D G M E N T.

"This action came on to he heard before the undersigned at Charlotte
on the 6th day of February, l9h5, for hearing of the motion of the Defendant for
summary judgment and of such other matters as might be then brought before the Court;
at which hearing the defendant was present by its counsel, C.N.Tillett, and the
plaintiff was present in person and appeared in his own behalf.

"And it appearing that the plaintiff had on January 31, 19h5, filed in the
Clerk's office of this Court his affidavit alleging prejudice on the part of the
undersigned Judge against the plaintiff and praying that the undersigned disqualify
himself from further hearing of this cause; and the undersigned being of opinion
that said affidavit was not in compliance with the terms of the statute in such
cases made and provided and was not sufficient in law, stated from the bench that
the motion of the plaintiff that the undersigned Judge disqualify himself and with—
draw from further hearing of this cause would be denied; and that the reasons for
such denial would be set forth in an Opinion later to be filed; and that the hearing
of the motion for summary judgment would be proceeded with. To which action of the
Court the plaintiff excepted.

"And thereupon the Court informed the parties that, preliminary to acting
upon the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the Court would set aside and vacate
so much of a certain order entered by it on April 18,19hh, as was related to a hearing
theretofore had before Judge Johnson J» Hayes and was predicated upon the action taken
as a result of such hearing; to which proposed action of the Court no objection was
offered by either party.

"And thereupon the plaintiff moved that the Court enter its order finding
and holding that C.h.Tillett, Attorney for the defendant,is not a qualified member
of the Bar of this Court; which motion the Court then and there denied, and to the
action of the Court in denying said motion the plaintiff excepted.

"And thereupon the Court proceeded to hear the motion of Defendant for
summary judgment in its favor, and having heard the arguments of defendant, by its
Counsel, and of the plaintiff, in his own behalf, took time to consider of said

"And the Court having now fully considered the defendant's motion for
summary judgment as well as the other matters presented to it at said hearing, and
having set forth its conclusions and the reasons therefor in a written opinion this
day filed as a part of the record herein,

"Now, therefore, for the reasons set out in said written opinion, it is

"O R D E R E D

that the motion of plaintiff that the undersigned Judge disqualify himself from
further hearing of this matter, be denied.

"It is further 0 R D E R E D


 that so much of the order entered by this Court dated April 18,19hh, as deals with
and is predicated upon a certain hearing before, and sibsequent action by, Judge
Johnson J. Hayes be, and the same is hereby, vacated; it being the intent to vacate
and set aside all portions of said order of April 18, l9hh, except such portions
thereof as deny certain motions of the Plaintiff, namely, to set aside and vacate an
order entered by Judge E:Y.hebb on May 26, l9h2, and for judgment in favor of the
plaintiff; as to which motions the said Order of April 18,19hh, remain firm and in

"And the Court being of opinion, for the reasons stated in its written
opinion referred to, that the motion of the defendant for summary judgment in its
favor should be granted, it is lurther

"A D J U D G E D and O H D E d B D

'hat judgment be and it is hereby entered in favor of the defendant, and that the
fntiff take nothing by his complaint, and that defendant recover of plaintiff its
3 in this action expended.

"Tt is further 0 R D E R E D

that the deputy clerk of this Court at Charlotte mail an attested copy of this order
to each of the following:

“C. W. Tillett, Attorney at Law, 609 Law Building, Charlotte, N.C.

"Ward M. Blanton, Care C010 T. L. Kirkpatrick, Attorney at Lang
909 Liberty Life Bldg., Charlotte, N. Ca

"Col. To L. Kirkpatrick, Attorney at Law, 909 Liberty Life Building,
Charlotte, N. C.

(s) John Paul
District Judge

Sitting by designation in the


hestern District of North Carolinaa"

O h D E R .

"The Court having heretofore, on April 9, l9h5, entered an order granting
the motion of the defendant for summary judgment in its favor and entering final judg—
ment in favor of said defendant, with which order there was filed a written opinion of
the court setting forth the conclusions upon which said order was based.

"And the plaintiff ap earing in his own behalf having on April 2lst,l9h5,
filed his motion that the said order of April 9, l9hS, granting judgment in favor of
the defendant be vacated ani set aside and that all orders, notices and motions made
or filed in this action subsequent to April 3rd,l9h?,be stricken from the record and
declared null and Vuid and that the court grant judgment in favor of the plaintiff
as of April 2h, l9h2.

"And the court having considered said motion filed by the plaintiff on April
El,l9h5, as hureinbefore Set out, is of Opinion that said motion should be denied.

"NOW, therefore, it is O h D E h E D

that the motion of the plaintiff filed on April 21, l9h5, to vacate the order of judg—
ment entered by this court on April 9,19h5, and to take such further action as is
prayed for in the plaintiff's motion and as hereinbefore set out be, and the same is
hereby, denied.

"To the action of the court in denying said motion and each part thereof the
plaintiff excepts.


 "The deputy clerk of this court at Charlotte will send an attested copy of
this order to each of the following:

"Ward M. Blanton, Care Col. . L. Kirkpatrick, Attorney at Law 909

Liberty Life Bldg., Charlotte, N.C.

“301s Ta L. Kirkpatrick, Attorney at Law 909 Liberty Life Build.ng,
Charlotte, H. C.

“3. Wu Tillett, Attorney at Law 609 Law Building, Charlotte, N.C.

(5) John Paul
District Judge,
Jitting by designation in the western Dist. of N.Co"

as by the inspection of the transcript of the record of the said District Court,
which was brought into the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit, by virtue of the appeal of the said Hard H. Blanton, agreeably to the act
of Congress, in such case made and provided, fully and at large appears.

AND WHEREAS, in the term of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand
nine hundred and forty—five, the said cause same on to be heard before the said
United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, on the said transcript
of record, are was argued by counsel.

ON CONDIDEiATTQN WHEREOF, It is now here ordered aid adjudged by this Court
taat the judgment of the said District Court appealed from, in this cause, be, and
the sr.e is hereby, affirms with costs»

U» 3» Circuit Judge»

UO 8. District Ju gee


"Filed and Entered

October 27, lQhS.

Claude M. Dean, Clerk,

U.3.Circuit Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuitc”


 o— 824 East [in “ ston Avenue
Charlotte 5 ,North Carolina
January 19th,1952

Mr.Fred M.Vinson, Chief Justice
supreme Court niilding

ef Justice:

I her letter of December 14,1951 in Which
you say you vveze rimig my letter to Judge John J.Parker
for attention nri ix3e ration. I ha ave also copy of Judg
er er's letter to y u of December 17,1951 and Judge Soper 3
letter of the 20th.

e ffO




Judge Parker was in considerable error in his
3t 1te uents. The truth of the matter is that Judge Parker
per:ona11y manipulated and maneuvered a pre-trial conference
on April 5,1945 when he knew of his own personal and Judie 18.1
knowledge that the Jud53e oi h:is own choosing was sitting 55
devs prior to the efiec tive date of the commission signed by
Judge tarher. It was further ascertained, by hired investigators,
that Jnuge rerker was engaging in cans tic critir cisms of the
plaintiff and his counsel in Civil -5ction U 291 in the District
Court t1ere3ov, creeting flalse and erronous impressions for the
mirnose oi di CP’erlU the plaintii'i. inerefore, on December
27,1945,l ciu W?ite Tudge farker,(Not requesting an interview)
but pointing out what I knew to be fleets and requesting him
to remain in character as a Judge of a Court of Iieview. The
letter speaks for itself and if you desire a copy I will be
only to g ed to forward you a copy of same.

I now noid affidavits conclusively establishing
the facts that neither Judge Aebh nor Judge John Paul have
ever complied with the otatutes as to the taking and depositing
the Oaths, as required by law, according to the records 01 the
Clerx' s o: the Courts. 1 have proof that they made orders
and entered Judgements in absolute violation of the provisions
of dule V—b of the Federal flules of Civil procedure and at the
instigation of a presumed attornev,who,according to the records
of the Clerks office was not a duly admitted member of the Bar
of tee Court-end in absolute violation of the rules of practice
as promulgated by the 5 tistrict courtyof lorth Carolina.

I ho3fi dulv attested ”True Copv" of a Mandate of
the Circuit oourt,2 ourtn Circuit,attsesteu as of the 16th
dav oi‘ nokuoner lM a1 as e ecuted on November 14,1944,Which


 ,«ge—cmer Justice Vinson

obviously disapoeared from the files-in as much as a Mandate
of an entirely different form and substance is now in the
files,according to a certified copy,which i also hold.

I hold in addition an affddavit of responsible
person —in niiich he states that h.Y .Webb admitted to him in
a conversation thit he ha d never co omelied Wit] the law as to
the taxing an depositing the Uaths,required b; law,befifire
performing the duties of a Federal Judge.

The fir esident has rem ved once and for all,Theron
Lamar Caurle ,from Public Office. He was a close collaborator
of JudgesT s deWo and Parker and doubtles learned many of his
tricns from tne1,i in that,they were older and more accomplished
artists of deceotion . The President,obviously,from newspaper
resorts,is trvio5,to purge the corruptionist from the isxecutive
uranch of the Covernuent. Don‘t vou think vou,ought, in vour
position as the Chief Justice 53e01allv in the fourth Circuit,
purge the courts of those who have no regard :or ethics and
the laws of the land. I request that you have the House Jud—
iciury Committee send a Committee to Charlotte and examine my
files and the facts in connection with the Fraud perpetrated
in Civil Mtion 281 a5ainst the plaintiff by purported atta
ornevs and 30-Cm1]_led sued o Judges.

If there we 3 not fraud and iixing in the case- I
am at ‘1 10‘s t) understand ,how, tile law firm of Uardner ,Morris son,
and Rowers oi >uite 1126, WOOdWan building , washiniton D. C. on
march 20,1944,vould know tliat t:ie plaintiff in Civil Action 281
in the seats rn Distcict oi‘ iIorth Carolina would NEVER be able
to win his case. They were,in no way, connected with the case
as far as the record reveals. Yet on that date,an attorney,
connected with the firm was able to write a letter to a Charlottte
attornev, forete.linv the outcome of the case in lessthan 90 eggs
aj.ter Judge La arker si5ned his order Wltfldrdwlng and fudge boper's
Commlo-lonlfi? Judge 1ant to preside, and more than 2% years befififie
the final order of Judge laul.

I reques vour orde ring of an investigation of the
whole case. There may be some most startling developments once
the iive""”“tion gets under way arr ,the facts as to the methods
us ed to ODfitiflCt and defeat justice, are brought to light. You
owe it to the American public and posterity to expose and purge
those who have no regard for the high office they presume to
o Cupv. :evbe vou can beat the Congres ss to the expose as the
President lid in t1e Candle matter, if vou act quickly.

very respe

m/fl/ /

aard n.313nton


 January 31. 1952

Dear Judge Soper:

I have received another letter from Ward M. Blanton, dated Jan-
uary 19th. copy of which I am enclosing herewith.

I note that in your letter to Mr. Blanton of December 20, 1951. you
state that you have considered his letter of December 3rd, addressed to me.
and "find that it does not relate to any pending action in the Di strict Court of
North Carolina or in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Judicial Circuit;
nor does the letter constitute a complaint filed in due course in either of
these courts;" and that you further state there is no action which the Court
of Appeals can take in the premises. Your reply to Mr. Blanton is entirely
appropriate with respect to his own claim for relief.

.There is. however, a further problem presented by Mr. Blanton's
serious charge that unauthorized court orders including "a forged Mandate
of the Fourth Circuit Court" are presently on file in the District Court. Quite
apart from Mr. Blanton’s claims for relief as a litigant — and however incon-
ceivable his charges may appear - I would be glad to have your advices with
reference to his grave assertions above referred to.

In my more than 10 years on the Bench. I have had quite some experi-
ence with disappointed litigants. I have nothing before me which shakes my
faith and confidence relative to the judges who have considered this litigation
nor the Clerks of the courts involved. but, despite my own personal conclusions
on the face of the papers before me. I feel it a duty - though he sitatingly per-
formed because of my high regard for all concerned - to call your attention
to Mr. Blanton's charge that the Mandate of the Circuit Court of record is not
the Mandate as issued. As I read his charge, the Mandate of the Circuit
Court disappeared from the files and what he claims to be a forged Mandate
substituted in its place. In effect, he is charging that there is alteration or
falsification of the Mandate, which is a serious crime, as well as his other
serious charge of removal of the Mandate.

I repeat that I have nothing to indicate that his charges have basis in
fact. but I believe it is our duty to investigate his grave assertions of improper
and criminal conduct referred to in 18 USC S 1506 and 18 USC § 2071.


I call this to your attention so that wesmey both be completely
satisfied that Mr. Blanton’a charges are groundless before the matter is
put to rest.

With the greatest of respect and pereorial regards. I am

(Signed) 33:66. Me; Zinger:


Honorable Morris A. Soper.
United States Circuit Judge.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fourth Judicial Circuit.
Baltimore 2. Maryland.


 finiteh fitatez (Emmi nf @ppeals

gfl'uurth Hjuhicial Gircuit



 flirtibzh $13125 (Emmi nf CAppzalg

gfiuurfh Euhiciul flirtuit




(_IJ.. -
34L; 4 <.eS

or the
the above
herewith en-
action that
ionf of Ward
‘ writer


6 m





C? (D

'r ' "a 4" 3
goal II-
430 mend
. ..

in tjl

was specially
Jrict of 1: »
‘~ufilified ',mo; . roluqfl

1““ 14/)
«J... I),


to have

on page


CH6 ctn63.

‘ppe 1511?".
except one,
plainf; if°‘s

':itx F‘TLcD M

~:- 0
r“, LU
{u {I} (L;

aflvers u


 (9 L1

L1 .
V. 1 J

i .


, 0











. tor at Mum-y A, 1952 ha ”Ramona as a tarsal notion

’ mm swans same! or M’s-mm
, mm mean:

156. $1.09
_ worm
PAGIFIC WWI. LIFE Imam; (SCREAM, 13991511.!
mm: H. Bhutan. the appénane heroin. having him.
cox-tun comayeadann in regard to m QWO 9323:1151“ can
that!» ch33“ mum: or his. Unified 31mm: and with tan
Judge. at w.- aom. Mata aimma, so um '

(1) '12.“th or Dunbar 3; 1951 um mm It. Bhutan
to an. chief muse tear”. ;

{2) Latter at ”combo: 14;. 19$). tron tho chief am.- ,
151°. to Ward H.‘ 8181mm (6019?). ‘ ' ’

(3) Latin;- 49: mamas: 14.1951 ram the can: m-
ties to can: Me: John I. Pam-Star. '

m Latter a: bum»- 29. 1951 km: Mum an“:
Gin-emit Judge: Hon-in A. San: ta arm 3!. Manta; how);

(53 Lottnr at January 4,1952 rm and as. manta: ‘
to mac. 80m -

and the MM am it. 81min: mum «matted an h“ 108.-

thnt an. on." passoa' ”fluted Mates maria M's. Jam
Paul in the Mun-lot can” 13 than. an he wanted. it.“
”dared am said wrunmndoau b. to filed and mail-am;
”a . _ ,,
What-nu, it impart in. ma com-pondcmo that
said motion is land upon 9h. ”mansion that m emirm
Judge has our mama or upward in an. Dinner. «can in
thin aadb. in me tin record. do not disclose that either
nausea Stat-o mung: Mg. mun r. was or Unit-a sum:
District Judge John Paul. who mud“ 3a. the rum-1oz 0mm.
had «or run: in the court in men in served the oath" or
am» ”and“ by law. and home all e: the ordcn of
m mus-103W panned heroin use void and or no effect; g











 Whoreaa, 1Q glee appear: tram said gorreapunnonce
that th nanflato of this «our: an :11. with the Distriet
court; alleged by Warn u. Bianton to be gassed, 1: QQQ asap
date or Quin court filed on flbvember 145 1944 1n Qua tirQQ
appeal in case HQ. 5282.

SUV QhorcroQO5 the acurQ makes the follanng find”
tags nan determination:

(1) The Quart has exam1naa Qha mandate of this court
above dascribod and finds it Qo he the genuin6533ndaQe 02‘-
this oaurt whereby the appeal Q: 1121 31 Blanten in uppaal
nu; 5282 was dipnissad an pruanaris Soc 146,3;2d $25;
(Fur copy of said mandate soc appellfintés aypénaix in gas.
Nb; 54095 p; 55}. . _

(2) The chrQ finds that an: ardors 0:111a591311111
Court herototbrb passed hersin by fudge “ebb nag Judge PQEIV
wire an unauthorized and 10115 but rare Qua QQQQQQ at QBtl‘
itied District Juneau who had oaah nervea 1n Qua cities at
Batten Statos nintriet Judas for a period  9!‘39!3 Qhaa Qua
years prior Q9 the institution or this suit in the fliatrict
Gourt5 Judas With having served as Uniteé SQQQQQ EanricQ
Judge for th Wistorn Bistriafi or HQrQh Carolinn~uineo hi!
appointmenQ on savanna: 55 1919, and Judge Qua} having sort»
ed as Un1ted State: DistrioQ Jung: fin": tho WosQoru EistrioQ
of Virginia since his appozatmant on January 153?;933,
hating bacn specially acaisnatoa by the groaidifis Stage a:

this'conrt to sit in this case; and Qha QourQ furthor rind: ;

tht Qha authoriQy of said smash: to set in sa1hieapae1Qy

was not arrested by the omission in either QaQo-5 1: such ood' i
currcd, to comply uiQh Que diroatory provision: at 5

Stot1on 215 thQ the oath of artist at a UniQngQQaQaQ Piaf
QrQQQ Judge thil be aul1vorad to the oourQ to which tho


oath apporQa1na.


$flfi§1——m*’m’ "5 ‘3‘“.21 EM . ~ WWW ”RAW mam}; _ . .11; m}: 2-411»; _, - a
‘7 , V . .1.» A,.>»,.w«;r.'px»~i ’ ‘ aria». rrv.:.V-,-i,‘: mmmwqué, gm: u a cfiwfin’guzs'mu J. .. . ' 1“ .-..~‘u$3v.'§a3\:".-k. mtwb f. “.M‘fimx-smwm , .4 .

It 13 therein" ”dam this 4‘ 0“ any at Karon.
1952. 'by the canon “Statue cm: a: Appeals for 1m 1mm

circuit. that. tn: above melanoma notion be and m «we is
harsh: 4.31m.

Morris A. Soper
‘- I ‘ ran ' 83

Armistead M. Dobie

Hiiifia Sfififiea Uireuifi 3533.

Sterling Hutcheson


A true copy,

T e s t e:


15. Court of Appeals for the








Nb. 6 - 824 E. Kingston Ave
Charlotte, north Carolina
December 3, 1951

Ben. Fred M. Vinson, Chief Justice,
Washington, v.0.

Dear Mr. Chief Justice: Re 281 Civil - U.u. Dist. Ct. Western'N.C.



The President on Nbvember 16, 1951 forced by resignation from Fed-
eral Service Theron Lamar Candle thereby bringing to an end his nefarious
and illegal activities extending back through many years. Immediately the
controversy broke before the House committee his former ally and goon
Frank N. Littlejohn of Charlotte rushed into print to say that Candle had
requested the prosecution of Blanton in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg


Candle and Littlejohn and others conspired to frame the Writer i