Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-04-29
SYPHER'SFAMOUSLETTER
INVENTOR BELL TELLS HOW HE
CAME BY 1T.

Sent to Him by the Ex-COngressman and
Acc pied a Friendly Offer The
Warning Contained in the Accom-
panying NOte-AI His Stock Turned
Over to His Wife.
WASHINGTON, April 2S.-Prof. Bell
was the first witness before the Tele-
phone Investigating Committee to-day.
He related that he had transferred to his
father-in-law, Gardner G. Hubbard, and
Mr.. Saunders his inventions, they to fur
nish the capital to develop them, and the
results were to be divided between the
three, and that he Bell had made a gift
Of his entire interest TO his wife, and that
she is now one of the largest holders Of
the stock. Mr.. Bell knew very little Of
the business OF the company.
Gardner S. Hubbard followed. But
little information could be drawn from
him il regard to the business affairs OF
the Bell Company. He now holds 1000
shares OF the American Bell Company
stock. MIR. Hubbard said he had had
nothing to do with the newspaper publ
cations. substantially the same article
that appeared 10 the Wortd he had sent
to the President of the Bell company be-
fore it's publication.
GIVEN TO HIM BY MR., BELL.
1t had been given to him by Mr.. Bell,
with statement that he would find it TO
be curious paper relating to the Pan
Electric, and that he might like to use it.
Mr. Bell had told MIN that it had been
voluntarily furnished by ex-COngressman
Sypher, formerly OF Louisiana, who lived
directly opposite Mr.. Bells house in
Washington. The witness did not know
where Sypher obtained the article. Presi.
dent Forbes informed him that il was not
the policy OF the Bell company to enter
into newspaper controversy. No price
had been fixed for the article.
NOT SURPRISED.
The witness did not feel surprised when
he saw the article in the IVOrtG, although
be had had no intimation thas it would
be published. He had done nothing to
further the investigation, although he re.
gaTded it as good thing.
Mr.. Bell was then recalled and exam
ined relative to the article furnished by
Sypher. He did not wish to violate con.
hdence but would. produce Sypher's note
accompanying the article il the committee
insisted
Mr.. Boyle did insist and the witness
read the note as follows:
WASHINGTON, April 26, 1885.
DEAR SIR hand you herewith an anthem
tic statement Of facts compiled by my asso-
ciate, Mr.. (. n. Hin, which NAV interest you.
The scheme to destroy your patents was
tolerably well matured, and it rem inns to
seen whether this reform administration will
lend itself to its contamination. Truly yours,
j. HALE SYPAER.
TAKEN AS A FRIENDLY OFFER.
The witness said he took the article as
friendly offer by Mr.. Sypher, and had
sent copy of the matter to Mr.. Storrow
on the next day after he had received it.
Several members of the committee ex-
pressed some curiosity as to who e. n.
Hill was.
Mr.. Ranney remarked that be was the
person Casey Young had spoken of as his
clerk, but MIR. Young Indignantly denied
that he had ever said anything of the
kind.
The Chairman suggested that the
Hill referred to was the
same person who had figured in another
investigation now going on. (The investi-
cation into the alleged use of money to
procure an appropriation for levee pur-
poses at Evansville, Ind. He would be
called upon to appear. but was reported
to be sick at present. The article enclosed
by Mr.. Sypher was then read and
proved to be Identical with the World
publication. The witness stated that
Mr.. Storrow told him that he had not fur
nished the matter to the newspapers. 1t
is understood that the editors of the New
York Tribune. World and Times and the
Washington correspondents of those jour-
mails will be examined tomorrow.