The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-08-17
THE pAN-ELECrRIC CASE.
Attorney-General Garland Files His Answer
to the Bill in the Suit of Rogers.

Attorney General Garland Files His Answer
to the Bill in the Suit of Rogers. Is
WASHINGTON, Aug. 16.-Messrs. Morris, Earl
and Pugh, as solicitors for Attorney general
Garland, to-day filed his answer to the bill re-
Gently filed by j. Harris Rogers against Attor-
ney-general Garland, Senator Harris and others
for settlement of the affairs of the Pan electric
Telephone Company. Mr.. Garland, in his an
swer, denies in detail every material statement
in the bill and calls attention to the scandalous
and impertnent matter in the bill; says he must
decline to answer portions unless the court di-
rects to do so. In concluding his answer, the
Attorney general says that, being invited by one
or more of his co-defendants to become inter
ested in aiding to develop certain inventions of
the complainant, he did, on or about Feb. 10,
1888, attend a meeting of the parties interested
at the residence OF the complainant, on
Four-and-a- Half street, N. W., in this city, and
that except this he attended only two other
meetings, and that it is exceedingly probable
that there are MANY details Of this business
whereof he is wholly uninformed, and as to all
such matters he would rely with more confidence
upon the books and records of the company than
upon his own knowledge; that, so far as he is
aware, all the agreements of the parties as be-
reduced to writing and are fully aud completely
set out in the contract dated March 13. 1883,
which, on his behalf, was executed by his attor-
ney in fact. Isham G. Harris" The Attorney
general further AYERS ''that be has paid the sum
of money therein agreed by him to be paid, and
in addition thereto some further sums or assess
ments made, and all that were made
by the parties to the contract named,
and in pursuance thereof and for the
purposes therein set out And he entered into
no other agreements of any kind in the premises
with the complainant or anyone else And he
further says that he was impressed by the ap-
parent usefulness Of the inventions, and had
great confidence in the legal ability of the
patents, and believed that their validity would
be judicially sustained in any litigation insti-
stituted for the purpose, and that in that event
they would become very valuable, If honestly
managed on business principles; that until their
legal validity was thus judicially established it
was by himself and his co,6efendants deemed
unwise and improper to issue the stock of the
company, which had been duly and legally char
tered, and to which company said patents had
been legally consigned in pursuance of the agree
ment; that the written contract hereinbefore
referred to, the original whereof will be duly
exhibited on the top of this cause; was intended
and does carefully guard against such premature
issue of scrip for the stock, by providing
that all of the stock should be held jointly. He
submits that said contract does not constitute a
partnership, but that it Is an agreement between
the parties thereto as to the obtaining OF char
ter for specific purposes and for the manage
ment of certain interests thereof when chartered
and organized Hereunder, and he submits to the
court here the proper legal construction OF said