New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-04-07
GOODIES SPEEDY ACTION.
TRYING TO SHOULDER RESPONSIBILITY.
HIS IGNORANCE OF LAW AND PkEcEDkNf-fhAiL
BASIS FOR AN IMPORTANT ACTION.
rny TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBuNE.l


were letter OF Cory The unsworn statements Oh
four p-ttoners regarding whose crodbllity or respect
ability lie knew nothing the Original OF COPY VI -"
AFFIDAVIT by Wilbur. and certified copy OF So"o 'e"
years old papers from the Patent once f'ior W '
time he bad never heard the Bell patent which WAS
nearly years DID, had been the subject OF hRa'o"
He had never heard OF single one offhe celebrated
telephone suits-the Drawbsugh, Overland, Dolbcar
Molecular etc-and was wholly Ignorant of the fact
that at when he issued his order three s's III"
volvng the validity OF the Ball patent were penohg oe
fore the Supreme Court OF the Tn tea staes IN iac
the testimony Of Mr. Goode indicated that he Is dsh
guished mainly OF the number and variety OF
to his which he does not know
Mr. Goode declared that he could have discovered no
earthly lmproprety" In the actionif Garland hipse"
had ordered the suit to brought McCorry had writ
ten that the parties specially Interested IN tue heS
ton stood ready pay all tie expenses OF ooeu
States suit and yet Mr.. Goode test fes that his under
standing that the suit was TO be brought ror the
benefit of all the people," and tho fact that certain per-
sons were specially Interested" produced no impress
sion upon his mind.
Mr. Goode produced tho papers received from DISTRICT
Attorney McCorry. with the exception OF an a"v os
Van Benthuy and a certified copy OF tho hie wrap
uer of the Bell patent speccaton which he SAID could
not be found lie spent day and evening in reading
the papers
Mr. Rsnney inquired If the witness had regarded 1t as
his duty 10 bring suit
Mr. Goode led that while he ala not reel o"hHcu u
do IT, yet acting Attorney General he had no right TO
close the OF the against anybody WHO coud
Get into court only avenue as had been de-
cidcd by The Supreme Court.
Mr. Ranney asked WHY there had peen such haste In
passing upon the applications why had not the witness
awaited the return OF the Attorney General
Mr. Goode did believe that there had been haste
Twenty four about much time as could De
devoted to an application bring suit A 10 the law
amt facts sustained by the Interior Depart
ment. Even had the AtorneyGeheral been ID Washing
ton he would refused to act In the case ana the
witness would had to pass upon the application.
Mr. Ranney asked II it vas not singular that four
distinguished counsel had been Wiling 10 act ior 'no
United states without pay.
NJ. Goodo replied that he had not considered the mat
ter lie had granted the request OF the DstrctAtorney
Government oiiicer-with the stipulation that they
should receive aud that the controi OF tho SUIT
should remain hands OF the District Attorney lie
had never been better satisfied with official action OF
his action OF ordering the suit ana he
did not regard that as brought for the promotion
OF individual interests but for tho benefit OF the pn0c
Mr. Ranncy said that the counsel had not been COM
mssionei special counsel as required by statute.
NJ Goode replied that 10 did not regard them as
special assistant counsel coming into the
case at Mr.. McCorrys request or by his permission lie
la not given special thought to the question OF why
Mrssrs. Young. CAN'T and Beckwth wished TO appear
in the case nor did he make any inquiry.
Mr.. Ranncy inquired II the witness could give any
reason now why he could not ana ala not inquire OF Mr.
Young when he called TO ask about papers what MS
relations to this matter.
Mr. Goode I don't give any thought to MT Young IN
the matter based action on All official letter OF
Government officer and the documents ee transmitted
and the impression made Oh my MIND as 10 the pro-
prety OF the derived entirely from these docu
Dents | had no conference with MI. loung on Tue
subject
Continuing witness said that he did not profess to
be nfallble; he might have male mistake. but he
want to full responsibility on himself ~ he
had known Of the prior applications Of Rogers ana Ben
huysen II he hal known OF the AttofneV-Uenera n-
tercst the Pan Electric he would have acted pre-
els ~ a. he had DONE sspesla III W." VI "" , ond
OF supposed disability In addition he had had the
formal application Of Government omcer accompanied
nv naper. that seem II 10 Justify the He did
believe that the Bell Company was entitled 10 consider
ara not regard c tne affinity mat It could not
he called into court Ike other compsnies
Mr. Ranney asked II the witness had not heard In the
ten years that the Bell patent existed Of OF the
suits o the validity OF that p'teu -
Mr.. Goode replied that he hsi not' nc was not paw
ent lawyer and had not read tho reports OF patent
Mr. Ranney inquired how the public would be benefit
Ell II ny breaking down the Bell monopoly another mo
nop0ly should I've estabishrd 49,.
Mr. Goode replied that the papers seemed 70 sho that
the sea OF the hal been paced either lpro-
vdenty or surreptton'ly upon !. paper tbe.' paenO
unnor had spruny np and he thoncht would he for
benefit OF all the people to Drrak down that nohopob
madr) ana to throw the business open to the puhllc
Mr.. Rauney inquired how tue pubic would oeneht II
GRAY should receive the patent
NJ Goode responded TIM, did consider what the
effect of the snli would be on the cray patent
Mr. Ranney asked n decision III Uned states SUIT
would he mutually conclusive In It's Effects
Mr. Goode snpp's send not nrc"t ;uriher tisa
uou admitted. but II would practically make AN
The Columbus suit had not been ordered. Mr. Goode
said b-caus. 1t would be tried BY jude DaIirr;
local circumstances. Memphis had been avoided be-
there ght have the aprarance ot be'ng
rene old snt No had ever said 10 him that
the suit should before judge Baxter becsuse
he was patent 'masher' ana tne "insss nau nr..
that statement IN the newspapers since mo ordcr
he would CRAFTY senator Harris anu Mr. Young ~
granting McCorfys application
| MI Kanney-You know that Harris WAS Senator.
| Mr.. Rannoy-And you had not been confirmed
Tn. wIrne.. added that ne had not Harris
hs dozen Tune. in hs NE anu there was QUO point ne
had no more to do With the institution OF this than
ANY member of the cUmmitiee.
MIR R,nney inquired II there was single issue in Tho
Columbus suit that had not been raised In the cases
already tried or pending before The supreme Court
(oode piled that the associate counsel were on
iged in an examination OF those matters. lie would
say Columbus suit would be altogether different
from any tried In this country
The Chairman remarked that the ~itne,. had better
not disclose tue Governnrnts line OF procedure.
Tue wncss remarked that he would be careful In that
respect ,. a.. o,..,,o. ...,,r. % -.
| Mr.. Ranney again put his question relative 10 the
issues raised the replied that the Gov
srurprnt undoubtedly meant to .,ise new Issues
| Mr.. Rannry-What are th-yf
| Mr. Goode-I don't feel 1t liberty to tell you.
In .ponse to Mr. Willard tho witness said that no
hal the OF the Memphis suit be-
cause he would he agreeable TO the President
Mr. Miiard asked by what authority the wtBesa had
already paid $1,000 In counsel fees. no money having
been appropriated for the purpose.
Mr. Goodr did believe thai special appropr alton
was necessary fees had been paid out OF the fund
| appro Dria cd for the paw OF assistant counsel
As the ex animation a-an touched upon the visit 20
fh.D rtineu Of S,uA n.
Oates asked II II customary when Senators ana
Members called at department ask about sose mat
| ter of businrss to deuaud-" What 10 your business
| what is your ut. rcslf
The witness smiled and replied that that was not his
style
In answer Chairman Boyle the witness sal that he
| believe that when n Government suit was in-
VOWED the interests Of private individuals should be
| considered II the broad claim OF Bells could he
nuled he did not how any other person could mo-
| I.lIref nni eInu