St. Paul daily globe., 1886-07-01
A CANARD'S COLLAPSE.
Report of the Democratic Members of the
House Committee on the Pan-Elec-
trio Scandal
Attorney General Garland and Others,
Against Whom Charges We're Made,
Fully Exonerated.
Senator Edmunds Introduces a Bill
Giving the President Extraor-
dinary Powers.
The Sundry Civil NJ Preparing
for the Presidents Trip
on the Lakes.
The pan-Electric Reports

The PaM-Electric Reports.
WASHINGTON, June 30.-Mr. Boyle of
Pennsylvania, from the Pan-Eectric COM
mittee, submitted a report signed by four
members of the committee upon the sub
Jeets of its investigation. 1t is accom-
panied by the following resolutions:
Resolved, That a full, fair and exhaustive
investigation has failed to adduce any evil
dence which tends to show that Attorney
General Garland, Solicitor General Goode,
secretary Lamar and Indian Commissioner
Atkln, Railroad Commissioner johnson or
senator Harris, they being the officers named
In the Pan-Electric publications of the news
paper press, which gave rise to this investi-
cation. did any act, official or otherwise, con-
nected with the matter investigated which
was dishonest, dishonorable or censurable.
The report and the resolution (which is
concurred in by Mr.. Hale) were referred to
the house calendar. Mr.. Ranney of Mas
sachusetts also submitted report signed by
the four Republican members of the COM
mittee. Mr., Hale of Missouri presented
his individual views. These reports are
placed upon the calendar. Mr.. Reed
(Maine) reserved all points of order against
the resolution accompanying Mr.. Boyle's
report and Mr.. Ranney, stating that the
resolution had never been submitted to the
committee or acted upon by it, also re-
served all points. MI. Boyle said that the
resolution had been presented with the
consent of the gentleman from Massachu-
setts. Mr.. Ranney replied that that was
true as far as the report was concerned. but
he had never seen or heard of the resolu-
ton before. Mr.. Boyle thereupon asked to
Withdraw the report and resolution, but
MI. Hale objected
Chairman Boyle of the Pan-Electric tele
n1Onn tod 10 tho
house report on the
RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION,
signed by himself and Messrs Oates, Eden
and Hall. 1t says:
What DR.. Rogers offered to Messrs. Carlisle
and others was stock in corporated and Or
ganized companies. What he transferred to
Garland, Harris and others was an interest in
Inventions in their then condition of no value
whatever, and only to be made valuable by
joint efforts of the Rogers and these who
joined them in the undertaking. That the
capital of the telephone company was fixed
at $5,00O,00C is wholly immaterial. Had it
been fixed at $4,000, the thing they owned,
and their proportionate interest in it, would
have been the same. The evidence does not
show that these gentlemen were admitted by
the Messrs. Rogers with any expectation of
prohting by their official positions or official
action Gen. Atkins. the party to whom they
made the proposition was not in Office. They
certainly
EXPECTED NO OFFICIAL AID
from him. The right to select the other
three was given absolutely to Senator Harris,
and no condition was imposed that he should
select persons in office. At that time Mr..
Garland was not thought of for attorney gen.
eral He was suggested by Atkins and it
need hardly be said in view of his previous
life and his character that it was rot thought
he would use his official power to forward q
private enterprise in which he was interested.
Casey Young was named by Rogers. He was
not to appear i'll congress until nearly year
after. Gen. Johnston was not in office and
did not expect to be. IT official influence was
the consideration for the interests transferred
to Harris and to Garland, what was the con-
slderatlon for those transferred to Atkins and
Johnston The committee has failed to find
that any legislation was contemplated at the
time this company was formed or during its
existence up to the present time, by which it
or its members could possibly have profited.
The only matter spoken Of was in relation to
the establishment OF a postal telegraph by the
government This had been agitated for
some years. When mentioned Senator Har-
riS stated to his associates that if it came up
in the senate he would make known his inter-
est in the matter and decline to VOTE SO that
NOTHING WAS EXPECTED FROM HIM,
and according to the testimony of all the
parties nothing was expected from anyone
of the members. There is no evidence that
Mr.. Garland ever heard of it. The report
finds nothing unusual in the method adopted
by the Rogerses for developing their inven-
tions and bringing them into use and to the
attention of the public. Undoubtedly DIR.
Rogers expected to profit by the association
with gentlemen of known ablitr and distinc-
ton. But the reports ask, ''Did they intend
to use their powers as public officers to
further the private enterprise in which they
engaged? Did they intend to prostitute their
honorable regulations and their high posi-
tons to impose upon the government or the
public worthless inventions and to obtain
money by fraudulent and dishonest prac-
tees? In other words did these men TO whom
wrong doing had never before been imputed
and who are regarded now by those who
have given the widest circulation to the
charges against them as guilty of no 'vehal-
ity,'' but at most OF an ''impropriety'' intend
to become and
DID THEY BECOME sCOUNDRELs
all at once? When Il man enters congress he
does not cast the world behind him, and he is
not expected to give up the pursuit of worldly
business. Such is not the practice, and, if
this were required, some Of the best men in
congress would be compelled to leave it. All
that can be asked is that man in public
Office shall not use the power or influence of
his place for III e advancement OF his private
interests and that he shall not be controlled
or Influenced in the discharge Of his official
duties by any other considerations than those
that look only to the public good. So long as
man in public Office does not improperly
use the power or influence OF his position,
and does no more than a private person
may properly do. in the view of the commit
tee, he cannot be held TO have done anything
deserving of censure. The report maintains
that
NO STOCK WAS EVER ISSUED
by the Pan-Electric company and in connec-
ton with Senator Vests purchase Of an in
terest says that the propriety and honesty of
that gentleman's transactions are unques-
Memphis the report devotes some space to a
review of the testimony at that point and
finds that the Washington meeting of the
Natiohal Improved and Pan-Electric people
was not proposed with Il view to the inStitu-
ton of a government suit. The history of
the proceedings at the conference is given
in detail and the report says: Now up to this
time what has the attorney general done, per-
nitted or advised in relation TO Il govern
ment suit? He had received DR. Rogers let
ter of May "a and dpigeonhoed it. He had re-
eeived Mr.. Benthuysen's letter OF July IL
and referred it to the department OF tile in
terror without recommendation. i delega-
ton had called on him and he had absolutely
refused to be talked TO on the subject on the
ground that he was interest ted in d telephone
company. No judges of Il court ever behaved
more discreetly or circumspectly or honor
ably. If he erred at all it was in positively
REFUSING TO HEAR THE MEN
who had called on hun. The same day that
Mr.. Garland left Washington for Arkansas 10
be gone six weeks the party. had O assur-
ance OF government suit for they Were to
''obtaiu if possible the action OF the govern
ment and of course it had not been done.
OF Solicitor General Goodies treatment OF the
application to bring the Memphis suit the
report says. There is no reason TO question
the correctness of Mr.. Goodies statement. 1t
is not only uncoatradicted but fully sup
ported by all the witnesses who testified about
the same matters. He was not connected with
any telephone company, had no interest of
any kind to be affected by the suit and had
no knowledge OF any previous application.
He had not been Informed of Mr.. Garland's
connection with any telephone company. and
Lad he been there should have been made no
difference in his conduct. IL the view of the
committee, while 1t would would doubtless
have been better to have referred the appli-
cation to the department of the interior (as
Si1nk had heen the nracficnl nOtWifh Stnndi no