authorizes the custodian to take possession, there is no occasion for the granting of the order which the Superintendent of Banks seeks. The authority of the Alien Property Custodian to take possession of what he determines to be the property of enemy nationals, and the conclusiveness of his determinations except in the procedures specifically provided by the statute, have for some time been a matter of settled law (Act, § 5, subd. [b]; § 7, subd. [c]; U.S. Code, tit. 50, Appendix, § 5, subd. [b]; § 7, subd. [c]; Central Trust Co. v. Garvan, 254 U.S. 554; Stoehr v. Wallace, 255 U.S. 239; Commercial Trust Co. v. Miller, 262 U.S. 51; U.S. Trust Co. v. Miller, 262 U.S. 58; Ahrenfeldt v. Miller, 262 U.S. 60; Becker Co. v. Cummings, 296 U.S. 74; Miller v. Lautenburg, 239 N.Y. 132; Silesian-American Corporation v. Markham, 156 F.2d 793; Matter of Viscomi, 270 A.D. 732). As has been stated and restated in these and other decisions, a finding by the Alien Property Custodian that the property is that of an enemy national is conclusive for purposes of his taking possession, and the rights of those who claim an interest in the property are protected only — and, as a matter of constitutionality, fully — by the exclusive procedure which is provided therefor in the Trading with the Enemy Act.