The Sunday herald. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1866-1887, 1886-02-07
GARLAND AND THE PAN ELECTRIC.

lPnuauelpnla RecOrul
No one need begrudge MIR. Hanback,, of Kansas,
all the capital he can make out of his resolution to
investigate the origin Of the suit against the Bell
Telephone Company. An investigation is not likely
to produce anything that is not known Of the rela
tions Of the Administration with this subject. When
Senator Garland became the happy possessor of
100000 Of the fancy shares OF the Pan Electric Com
pany as lawyers fee he probably did not expect TO
be made Attorney General Of the United States. At
it's actual or prospective value this fee was small
enough for any legal service that he might render
this largely inflated corporation There is no law
or custom that forblds member OF Congress from
owning shares in a private corporation or from be-
ing its legal adviser. When MIR. Garland was made
Attorney General he might have disposed Of his
shares of Pan Electric stock had he attached any
Importance to its possession supposed that such
ownership would conflict with his officiai duties
Conscious rectitude sometimes neglects the precau
ons that cunning and guilt rarely fail to provide in
order to cover their tracks.
But when the Pan Electric asked Attorney Gen.
eral Garland to bring suit in the name of the United
States he declined to do so because he was stock
holder in the company in whose behalf the applica
tion was made. Solicitor General Goode then granted
the application in the absence of Attorney General
Garland and without his knowledge or consent.
Upon an intmation from the President permission
to bring the suit was revoked and the question was
submitted to the Secretary Of the Interior for his
decision. Upon a patient hearing of all parties
Secretary Lamar decided that the facts warranted
the bringing of suit in the name of the Government
and people to test the validity of the patents on
which the Bell Telephone monopoly rests.
Up TO this time there is nothing in the Official or
personal relation Of Attorney General Garland to
this that is not consistent with the highest in
tegrity and honor He has not used his official posi-
ton or influence in the slightest degree to promote
the suit against the Bell Telephone Company. On
the contrary, when application was made to him to
bring suit he promptly declined because he happened
to hold shares in the Pan Electric Company.
1t said, however, that as owner of these shares
pending the suit Mr.. Garland is morally incapaci-
tated from holding the once of Attorney General.
But what has the Attorney General to do with this
suit? Though brought In the name of the Govern
ment, without any Intervention of Mr.. Garland, pri-
vate parties represented by their own counsel are
the real complanants, and the Attorney General can
have no influence on the decision Should the case
be determined against the Bell Telephone Company
in the court below the monopoly has the right to
appeal to the Supreme Court Of the United States
This Ia the ultimate goal. The owners of the mo
nopoly have extorted such enormous profits from
the public that they can well afford to pay all the
legitimate and legitimate costs incurred in defend
irg this case. But the complainants must pay theil
costs out OF their pockets, agd In the hoped-fo
event OF their success its chief benent will accrue tc
the public In thus obtaining relief from blood
sucking monopoly.
The participation OF number of prominent mer
of the South In n telephone company affords M
reason why the whole country should he pIunderet
by lawess monopoly. II these persons obtained
their shares OF inflated paper capital in the Pal
Electric Company for next to nothing, that does no
prove that A. Graham Bell is the original invento
OF the telephone, or that his patents were no
fraudulently obtained. This Is question to be de
oided upon judicial grounds, without regard to tn
interests, near or remote that may be affected b.
the result. How the Pan Electric shares were dis
posed of by the extravagant protector has "nothin
to do with the case" He doubtless got for them al
they were worth. Large as is the nominal share o
Attorney General Garland, he came by 1t honestly
and there is no stain on his hands. Notwithstanding
the Industrious Efforts Of the Bell monopoly and II
partisan allies to besmlrch them.
Where, then, ia the motive OF all this Clamor? Tn
object Of the Bell monopoly s to divert public al
tenton from the real issue by liking, II possible.
charge Of offcial corruption or delinquency on tn
Administration under whose auspices this suit ha
been brought 1t Ia natural enough that In this des
| perate work the monopoly should receive some ai
slstance from the partisan enemies OF the Admins
tration. great point will be gained II the Bell Te
ephone Company can induce powerful party t
make common cause with 1t In its defense againi
this suit in the courts. BY making the prosecutio
odous In public opinion the monopoly hopes t
strongly influence the judicial tribunals Of the couI
try In its favor. There Ia reason to believe that
has overshot the mark. The public will now In
stlncty turn 10 watch the progress OF this cas-
through the COuIta.