The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-11-14

from the Patent Office records, and the evidence
was duly admitted. He also read an affidavit by
President GcSdwin, of the Globe company, tes
trying to Muerccis extreme poverty; that Muercci
was oppressed by the American Bell Telephone
Company, through the institution OF a suit
against him. and that the Bell Company. through
Its attorneys. had endeavored to purchase and
acquire the claims of Muercci.
Mr.. Starrow replied briefly to the affcavits
ne SAID that he had put in a sworn stenographic
report OF the Pittsburg trial. In answer to the
allegation that the Bell company had attempted
to buy Muercci's claim, he said that he could pro-
duce letter to show that the Bell company had
been invited to come to Philadelphia to negotiate
witn the Globe company, and that they mad sent
down representative, but that the Muerccl peo-
pie had declined to show him anything, and ne
returned no wiser than he came
Mr.. Beckwith inquired if he would be permitted
to put in counter affidavit, sworn to by five gen
temen, to the effect that no such invitation had
been extended by the Globe company; that the
Bell representatives had called upon Mr.. Good
win and associates, and spoken of millions of
money, and that the gentlemen representing the
Globe company had drawn their watches and
given the Bell representatives twenty minutes
to leave.
In answer to an inquiry by the Secretary. Mr..
Garrett said that if it was deemed desirable the
petitioners would cause tests to be made of the
workings of the various models submitted in
evidence. If the other side assailed their testi-
mony as to the workings Of the models. he would
like to put in expert testimony in answer
The Secretary expressed a preference for aft
davits other than oral, expert testimony. which,
he said. always had the effect of stampeding
him.
MIR. Starrow expressed wish to put in an afi-
davit by an expert.
Touching this line of procedure, the Secretary
SAID that the case would resolveitse into ques-
ton OF expert testimony, and no doubt both sides
could produce evidence to sustain their respect
i've cases.
The counsel for the Bell company expressed a
desire to examine and test the models submitted
by the other side, and long discussion took
place between the opposing counsel as to the
| impatiently directed the gentlemen to come to a
agreement; if they could not do that, he would
require the models to be examined in his pres
ence. After some discussion it was decided to
begin the arguments tomorrow. Secretary
Lamar warned the attorneys that they must be
brief as he expected to finish the case this week.
Mr.. Blackwell, who was of counsel for the de-
| Tense in the Pttsburg case, made a statement
touching the proceedings in that case. He said
the court had declined to go into the question of
the validity of the Bell patents Mr.. Blackwell had
Offered to prove that the Reiss instrument would
transmit speech, and the court said if that could
be shown he would refuse the injunction, but on
second thought said that would make differ
ence, and the question of the practcabllity Of
the Reiss instruments was not discussed.
Mr.. Dickerson pointed out that Mr.. Bakewells
statement placed the Pittsburg court in very
disagreeable light He appealed to Mr.. Bake
well to recall the facts, and to try to remember
whether Judge McKennan had not said that if
Mr. Starrow would acknowledge that the Ress
telephone would transmit speech, he would
deny the injunction, and that Mr.. Starrow had
declined to make any such admission.
Mr. Blackwell admitted that such statement
had been made, but said it referred to another
occasion, and he persisted in his statement.
Adjourned until tomorrow