Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1886-04-21

appointed st his solicitation, had declinet
! to sit in the case, because of his friendship
and old acquaintance with the witness
He had seen some notice now and thel
about Mr.; Garland being the recipient o
| q block OF stock as gift" OF course ther,
had been no gift about it. As to the ques
tion OF propriety, there was no more i'm
propriety in his position than in the case o
gentlemen holding railroad stocks in Con
gress, or Congressman going over to tn,
8 ipreme Court to practice for money. il
was
A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS
and witness had never learned of any leeis
)ation being asked. His only regret was il
had not "passed OUT II any question
had come up in Congress connected with
the company he should not have voted fol
it. He had recommended DR.. Rogers and
his son to Messrs. Cox and Hewitt, because
he considered them as very competent men
in their line. Witness had talked with
Architect Clark about Harris Rogers ap.
plication for appointment as
HOUSE ELECTRICIAN
and about putting in Rogers telephones,
but after consultation with Senator Ed
munds, president pro temD0re of the Sen
ate, Mr.. Clark had refused to
made the appointment. Thurman inquired
! if the witness regarded the stock as q gift.
He replied in the negative. Five or six per-
sons had come together for the organiza-
assessments, the first move being to give q
note for. $11 900, which was followed by
assessments OF $50 or 500 each. He did
Lot regard the inventions as having any
marketable value. The company was to
establish their utility and put them on the
market.
Chairman Boy1e-Did you contemplate
usipg your official position for the advan.
| tage of the enterprise?
Witness-Not at all. If l had been a
private citizen, would have done much
better than when in Office. He added that
he had no more idea using his official in
f1uence than of jumping into the Potomac
River with q milestone around his neck.
The company was simply an undertaking
by half dozen
| MPECUNIOUs GENTLEMEN.
They had never tried to boom business
and scatter stock upon the country; at least
| he had never heard of it.
The Chairman asked why the witness
| wanted to put telephone in the Capital,
! and witness replied that they wanted to
| exhibit the instruments to the public It
| was not the intention to bring them before
Congress. In answer to a question by the
Chairman, the witness said he had never
had q patent case in his life. Mr.. Hall in.
quired for the witness understanding of
the reason for referring the application to
the Interior Department. He replied that
it was simply for information and
such suggestions as they might see proper to
make in the premises. 1t was advisory, of
course. Referring to his vacation, witness
said that, believing Mr.. Gould would not
return in season, he was about to send for
Mr.. Maury. Under the statute, Mr.. Goode
had the right to act as we'll as in his wit
messy absence as in his disability, ana he
had expected, when he refa ed to entertain
the application, that the gentlemen would
go at once to Mr.. Goode. He did not know
that they would follow that course, and
had not suggested it. He had gone to his
home in Hominy Hills, Arkansas, leaving
instructions to send No department letters
to him. The house was 100 miles from
Little Rock and seventeen miles from any
where else.
Mr.. Ranney took up the examination at
this point. He questioned whether witness |
regarded
HIS STOCK AS PURCHASED,
as he had said it was not a gift. Witness
replied that it was not precisely purchase.
It would be difficult to define it in one
word; i'll, taking assessments into consid-
Grafton. it might be called a purchase. He
was $4O0 out by the assessments.
Mr.. Ranney began an inquiry into the con-
tracts OF the company, but witness knew
very little about them. Mr.. Ranny wished
to know to what extent he bad acted as
counsel for the company. Witness replied
that as he had stated. he had looked over
some legal papers brought to him by others,
but had not performed any other duties as
attorney. Mr.. Ranney took up the legal
phase OF the case and examined the witness
at some length rs to his understanding of
the issues litigated in Dolbear, Drawbaugh
and other cases. Witness had never under.
stood from the cases that he had said any
thing more than that question OF infringe
ment had been decided in each case. Mr..
Ranney asked why the witness had the feel
ing that party had
RIGHT TO BE HEARD:
that they should not be deprived OF that
right, and the duty devolving on the Solic-
ltor General. Had not referred them to the
Solicitor Gen raj. Witness answered that
he did not want to be concerned in the mat
ter at all after he had examinedit. He had
not to suggest what applications should go.
the gentlemen looked mad when
he had refused to touch the matter.
Mr.. Ranney-Did Casey and Young look
mad?
Witness-Casey did not look well pleased.
Continuing, he said that Mr.. Young did not
open his mouth a ter introducing the gen.
tlemen. 1t was du. to all sides that he
should state the fact that after he had de-
the matter OF ordering the suit, a number
OF prominent gentlemen-legal gentlemen
had written to him insisting that n ,twith-
his connection with the Pan Elec-
trio it was his duty to have brought suit.
Some OF the most prominent men in
the country had written to that effect. Mr..
Ranney objected to the statement. He did
not care to go into what people had writ
ten. Witness remarked that he was simply
trying to show his position at the time.
Mr. Ranney wished to know if the witness
the applicant that he was disabled and re-
fer him to the Solicitor General. "It would
NOT HAVE BEEN IMPROPER,
witness, 'but it was question
OF delic1cy with me-"
Mr.. Ranney-Don't you think you were
a little over sentative?
The Witness-No, sir. With me it was
a case like that of Lorenzo Dowsman. Ii
you do, you will be damned if you do
and be damned if you don't. [Laughter.]
Mr.. Ranney, referring to the previous
to hear the application, and sub sequent
search for the missing law, asked how he
knew that another application woul be
made. W tness replied that he did not
know; that he only supposed the parties
would return to request a reference of their
application to theSohcitor General. Then
they had also threatened appeal to the
President.
Mr.. Ranney inquired if it mad occurred
to witness as reason for not talking to
Mr.. Goode OF the receipt OF the applica-
tion that if he had told him OF his action
refusing to consider the aspiration that
Mr.. Goode might feel bound to reject it;
while ii he said nothing, Mr.. Goode would
act upon the origina! application, and
might grant the request OF witness. He re-
sponded firmly in the negative. As Mr..
Ranney still pressed tho witness for his rea-
son in remaining still, he remarked that
after that had occurred it seemed to him
that it was with
THE UTMOST PROPRIETY
that he had kept silent. He thought it
would have been extremely indelicate to
have said anything about it. Later on, re.
ferring to the Times Democrat dispatch
about the order for the suit received by him