Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-03-21
PAN ELECTRIC'S PATENTS
CASEY YOUNG AGAIN TAKES
THE STAND.

Company.
WASHINGTON, March 20.-When Casey
Young entered the investigating commit
tee room this morning be carried under
his arm two large letter books and several
packages of letters. When he took the
stand he produced a number of letters
which he had found and which ne nad re-
ceived from DR.. Rogers and submitted
them to the committee, first handing them
TO DIR. Rogers who waved them away, say
ing there was not letter which he wished
10 withdraw. The witness reiterated the
statement made by him yesterday that
there was nothing in the letters that re-
fected discredit on the company or DR..
Rogers.
THE ORGANIZATION CHAT.
Recurring to the conversation which
he held with DIR. Rogers in which an as
sociatiOn was suggested, the witness
stated that DR.. Rogers wanted the various
gentlemen in on account of their great
names and integrity, and honesty The
witness had heard nothing about stock
being gift or donation, though he had
not been educated up to any standard
which would have regarded acceptance
Of gift as a crime. Never had a word
been said about the associates using
their official influence or taking advan-
tage of their official position to accom-
plsh anything Tor the company. Never
had word been said which could not
with prOpriety have been published to the
world without bringing discredit to any
man.
NOIDEA OF CORRUPTION.
If DR.. Rogers had had in his mind any
thing corrupt in the transaction-lf he
had wanted any corrupt thing done-he
would net have gone to any of these gen.
temen to do it. He wanted to dissipate
the idea that the associates were in any
way to prostitute their official position for
the accomplishment Of any benefit to the
company.
The witness was then examined as to
The provisions of the agreement, but his
answers, while at times curt, disclosed
nothing of importance.
Mr.. Ranney having, In one of his ques-
tiOns made use OF the expression ground
floor" was interrupted by the witness
with the remark, contemptuously made:
Ground fioorl You know more about
ground floor than ! do"
MELANCHOLY LOAD.
A smile ran around the committee when
during the course of the witness testi-
mony Messrs. Oates and Hanback, entered
the room laden down with letters and
papers in the case, Mr.. Young said the
judicial examination but simply embodied
the ideas Of the partners. He believed he
had suggested the name span Electric"
Messrs. Oates and Hanback, reported
that 81 papers out of mass OF correspon-
dence submitted to them were relevant to
the investigation and several hundred
irrelevant.
Mr.. Young turned TO the minutes Of the
first meeting of the committee, with the
statement that he should have TO dIssipate
good many stories that these newspaper
writer's had been getting up.
POSSIBLE MERGING.
Pausing at a paragraph, Mr.. Young
said that the association had contem-
plated a possible connection of the tele-
phone exchanges to be established by
them with the Bell company's exchanges.
I'VE were not quite so well educated in
telephone matters then,' he remarked.
"Do you mean that you had trouble
with the Bell companyp' inquired Mr..
Ranney.
The witness replied in the affirmative,
and added with a tlnge of bitterness in
his tone: 81 had not been satisfied that
there was such monopoly (the Bell Com
pany IA monopoly that could control the
newspaper press, Congress and every
Thing else"
THE DERoGAToRY CIRCULARS.
In the course of his history of the trans
actions Of the Pan Electric associates Mr..
Young reached the Memphis suit. He
told OF the issue by the Bell Company of
derogatory circulars, and his reply that
the Court and not the newspapers was
the proper battlefield. AS the Bell
Company did not bring suit, Mr..
Young saw no resort but to bring
suit IN behalf of the Pan Electric Tele-
phone Company TO restrain the Bell Com
pany from publishing circulars, and also
10 test the validity Of the Bell patents.
Inc bill was filed on July 10, 1885. said
Mr. Young, and at the erequesto OF the COM
mlttee he put copy in evidence. Service
was made on the local agent of the Bell
.ompany, Henry M. Cooke.
THE PRESENT ISSUE.
That company had replied with motion
70 dismiss the bill for want OF Jurisdiction.
:, nat IS the issue between us now" said
mr.. Young. "We are ready to try the
case, but they have been fighting off,"
mr.. Young referred to Dr. Rogers state
meuV OF a conversation in which he (the
"ltness) was reported as saying that At
torney General Garland had consented to
urlhg SUIT against the Bell Company. He
asserted that the doctor had been in error
aS 10 Ihe conversation.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
me circumstances as he (Mr. Young)
5ecdile them were as follows: On MAY
~ 1884, DR.. Rogers had written letter
10 the witness at Memphis, in which he
,,slu ne had seen decision Of Judge
aHace IN the Cunning case, in which 1t
""s heid That suit might be brought /
~ lne Attorney General 10 annul a
patent The doctor seemed to be greatly !
,sntnused' over it, and said "Now is our |
11,ue'" We must make Attorney General |
9arIand file bill at once to annul the |
pell patents, and he wanted the witness
write to Mr.. Garland at once. lInme- |
u,ateiy upon the receipt OF the letter wit |
ness nad replied that Mr.. Garland could |
,.. no. nle Dill, and be (the witness could |
mol ask him to do IL.
TALKING rr OVER.
" nen the witness returned to Washing |
Dn, pr. Rogers told him Of the letter he |
,'u uau written TO the Attorney General, and |
Sle witness had told Or. Rogers OF his con- |
Wplence With Mr.. Van Benthuysen al |
H,sourg, and that that gentleman had |
G.tten 20 the Attorney General. asking |
u n'iu to brlng suit. The witness had dis. |
vvossea the matter with Dr. Rogers, who |
es very anxious that suit should be |
muusht. The witness had said that II |
~. ri' an Beuthuysen insisted upon IL. he /
ePposed the Attorney General would /
u9.e I've 10 DO ito bring suit, but that they |
no sus Ian an Electric Company could take |