The Teapot Dome oil leases were lawful and in the national interest
| The Teapot Dome oil leases were lawful and in the national interest | |
|---|---|
| FALSE | |
| "Interior Secretary Albert Fall's secret 1922 leases of federal naval oil reserves to private oilmen were lawful deals that served national security." | |
| Domain | Government, Law & Courts |
| Tactic | Fraud or Scam False Context |
| Era | Historical |
| First seen | 1922 |
| Origin | Interior Secretary Albert B. Fall and the Harding administration |
| Last reviewed | 2026-11-01 |
| Further reading: books on Government, Law & Courts | |
In 1922, Interior Secretary Albert B. Fall, serving under President Warren G. Harding, leased the Navy's oil reserves at Teapot Dome in Wyoming to Harry Sinclair's Mammoth Oil Company and at Elk Hills in California to Edward Doheny's Pan American Petroleum, without competitive bidding. Fall said the deals served national security by providing the Navy with oil storage.
A Senate investigation found that Fall had received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the two oilmen.
What the evidence shows
- Senate hearings. The Senate Committee on Public Lands, driven by Senator Thomas J. Walsh, uncovered in 1923–24 that Fall had suddenly become wealthy. Doheny had sent him $100,000 in cash, carried in a satchel, and Sinclair had given him cash and bonds.
- Leases canceled. In 1927 the US Supreme Court invalidated the leases, finding they had been obtained through fraud and corruption.
- Conviction. In 1929, Fall was convicted of accepting a bribe and sentenced to a year in prison. He was the first US cabinet member imprisoned for crimes committed in office. Doheny was acquitted of giving the bribe, and Sinclair served time for contempt of the Senate and jury tampering.
- Lasting precedent. The scandal produced McGrain v. Daugherty (1927), in which the Supreme Court confirmed Congress's power to compel testimony.
Why it matters
Teapot Dome became the American byword for government corruption for half a century. The official justification collapsed once Congress followed the money.
Sources
- US Senate Historical Office, "The Teapot Dome Scandal."
- Pan American Petroleum & Transport Co. v. United States, 273 U.S. 456 (1927); Mammoth Oil Co. v. United States, 275 U.S. 13 (1927).
- Laton McCartney, The Teapot Dome Scandal, Random House, 2008.