The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-04-06
THE TELEPHONE PATENTS.
HOW THE PAN-ELEJTRIC SUITS
WERE INSTITUTED.
Solicitor. General GOOde Before The
investigating COmmittee-Gar-
land Not Implicated.


General John Goode appeared before
the telephone investigating commit
tee to-day TO tell what he knew Of the
circumstances leading up to the inst,
tuition OF the Memphis suit. He raid
that he had been appointed TO his
office by the President upon the re.
commentator OF Attorney-General
Garland, snd'he did not believe that
Senator Harrie, or MessrF. AdkinF,
Young and Johnston, had anything to
do with his appointment The At
torDey-General left Washington on
August 9th on his vacation, and on
September I'd witness had received
the application Of District Attorney
McCorry Of Memphis, for permission to
bring suit which he (witnes) had acted
upon in the routine way. Attorney.
General Garland had never mentioned
the Bell or Pan. Electric company TO
witness until after his return from
vacation in October, when witness had
introduced the subject to him, having
seen 1t mentioned in the pubic press
Witness did not know that Mr.. Gar
land had any interts. in the Pan-Elec'
tr or any other telephone company
until he saw the newspaper publifa-
tons.
The chairman asked If witness had
ever conversed with any person prior
to the application, about telephone
matters.
He replied that he had not even
thought of the subject until the visit
| Of Senator Harris aud Mr.. Young.
u pom receiving McCorry's application
witness had examined the papers, and
spent the day and night in consider
ing what he regarded as the only
points in the case-frst, whether the
department bad power to order suit,
and, second, whether the papers pre-
scented made ont a primdJdcie case.
He had not given the appliCa' ion
special precedence, and no one had
requested him to do 60. 81 did moi
know OF the existence OF the Pan
Electric or National Improved Tels'
phone Companies" said the
witness; ~ knew very little o.
the telephone companies" Continu
ing, he said he had followed the
practice of the department in ordering
the suit land there had been ten Of
twelve such cases on Iecord) except IL
one particular. 1t had been custom
ary to refer applications of that kline
10 the Interior Department for any in
formation that the files OF that depart
ment might show, or any suggestion
they might wish TO make. He did no
follow that practice in this case, be
cause the papers submitted includet
the file wrapper and other matter
touching Bells application for a pal
emit, SO that witness did not believe
nee sssary TO refer the application, as h
had all the information the Ihtl
rior Department could give. Witnet
did not believe that the custom OF tn
, Department OF Justice had been IL
[ variable in this respect to referring az
plications to the Interior Department
When Attorney General Garland II
: turned after his vacation, witness ha
told him that If any miBtake bad bee
made or any wrong done, he woul
be responsible. Witness did NJ
know until that conversation that th
e Attorney General had any interest
a telephone company, and witness ba
felt it due 10 the Acknowledgement
q make the statement to the PIesiden
u and had done 60. At the suggestiC
q OF the President, witness had directt
@ McCorry to discontinue the Memph
i suit.
n The chairman said as thero had bee
j. many newspaper statements touchiI
y the Columbus suit the commit,
d would like to hear the reas ons 4
d, bringing the second suit at that plaC
lu The witness replied that many plac
ir had been considered, including Be
ne ton, Washington, Memphis and
~ Louis. ave concluded" said the W
lie ness, "that 1t would be better to bril-
g, suit in Columbus because there h
Id been no decision in the court at tn
m place bearing upon telephone sui
OF while in some form the question h
ne figured in every Eastern court. '
n. thought that in Columbus we could {
lie aperlectly fair impartial tribunal, AM
,ir forum where therewas no preconceiv
IL, opinion in regard to the matter. I
ed witness remarked that he wished
ne state that he did not know anybo
nj interested in any telephone compar
on he had no stock in any company a
If, did not know any stakeholder IL
od telephone company. 1t was due
oil everybody connected wi h the COVE
nu ment to say that they had but {
ng purpose in this matter, and that '
ne to have a fair, impartial trial OF
ny case.
ne In answer to request to etate
'd, amount Of fees to be paid to the E
oil cial counsel, he said that Mr.. WI
man was to receive fee Of $4,000
the entire case and the firm Of Hun
Il Chandler $4,000. Mr.. Thurman
NJ, to receive $1,000, with the understa
ing that his future compensation
to be fixed after the suits. He [
a ThuImau) could not stipulate in
fol- vance what his fees would be, but
had said: Il have never gouged
government, and do not propose
ING my time Of life to begin" Mr.. LoN
our who occupied an exceptional posi-
ned in his capacity Of electrical exI
in was to receive retainer Of $1,000
ind per diem oil $40 when in New y
the taking testimony, aud 500 W
and called upon to leave that city,
re- hours being called day.
and Adjourned.