New-York tribune., 1886-05-05
consciousness Of uprighn.ss woald allow such suit to

consciousness Of uprghtness woad allow such suit to
be brought.
Mr. Dana said that he owned stock in the Bell Com
pany or In any kindred company. lie had met iI
several times and found him TO be agreat anmonopoy
man. He had several times offered articles hirecteu
against the railroads and he had bought one orwo WITH
tn the Last five OF six years.
t,ns and referred particularly 10 an article eh',,co
rne Haunted Telephone. witch appeared IN the issue
Mr. Dana-That Il q story-a work of imasinasion-in
The Chaiiman"ro Illustrate the Pin.Electric enter.
Mr. Dana--Rather. and the general situation. You
will mud il very good reading; didn't write It, 1t was
written by OF the young men u tie ohice-A very
The Chairman Ciryly)-I guess so
The Chairman also referred to the article en- titled
| New Cabinet Officer" and remarked that IN neither OF
the articles the legal aspect discussed.
| Mr. Dana-Thcy are views OF political and moral
l wish had the facnlty to write such things ..o
lie REGARDED the articles severe attacks upon te
them jusiitan!c. i think it is generally kind Of
scandal" he sa'd " in which the ESecuiiTeof the unha
states is made Hillary" Continuing he said that ne
had no, attacked lie whole Administration. but certain
G"n r2ca y At deal wore earesy than Republican
President If he thought tho President was rlgh J.. ,,
The Chairman-Dd you not have some rcahou 70 us
approve OF the course administrator before the
discussion OF the Pan-Eectrc matters IN Ihe sun
Cvi Service PRINCIPLES. but there was no,ning aooui
,hst OF scand"Rns % tns Pm Was Of Inherent
nature ., =, A.. ,,,o oo,rso q, 1b. S,,,
nad Influenced by Other causes ofdssasfactio
Mr. Dana shoni thtk not; no man & can answer
Nj Ranncy-Iho stockholders had nothing to do with
Nj Dana crisply)-Thc duty Of the stockholders is
receive their dividends. lIaughler.J
Tue witness assented.
Mr.. Oates then inquired the witnesss reason for re-
garding the Pan-Electrlc as d scandaous concern
Mr.. Daua-I have never been able to lmbibe much
respect for the poets who originated It, inc sraniai
sockhoder AMI tnen using the Department. of Justice
to promote purposes OF private speculation. That,
Mr.. Oa,es-Are you aware that he became momber
OF the association long before he was appointed Attor-
Mr, Dana-IIe member as Understand it: while
United States Senator and instead OF initiating the cx
ample of General lie Fevre or Mr. Beach who sent back
Tins grauity. he kept IT, and that Think Is not proper
proceeding. .,
Mr. Oates-Are you not aware the stock they returned
stock of different organization-Posta leiegrapni
Mr. Dana-Nominaily, noininaly; uhucrs'ahu hhat
the stock issued by the same Interests tho ran
Electric branch OF the samo concern merely
question whether public otcrr should DC interested
In an establishment of which he may be required 70 VOC
Mr. oates imputed the witness did not know that
the Attorney General hai been abseut when the apIi-
The witness replied tna he did; but scrupnlous
Attorney General wont have been away and allowed
Mr. Oates.-suppose he did not know that the applca
Mr. Dsna-lle ought to have known that there was
mighty sharp set of fellows around The Attorney
General shoud not have allowed II he should nave re-
signed rather than have anytime to do with II.
Mr.. Oates-That is a pretty hiS! standard; .
Mr.. Dana-Not too high Tor an officer OF the American
Mr. Oates thought that that standard would require
the resignation Of adse If he shodd nc presented Win
a in which he personally Interested but the
witness maintained that there was no parallel IN nhe
cases. Ii hardly worth while. lie said TO cngig III
discussion OF these fine Legal points.
Mr. Oates explained that lo simply trying to
the points the witness made asans; the gentlemen
Uhe Pan Electric Organizcrs).
Mr.. DanaThe be entirely similar to the
Old Credit Mobilier whcre members OF COhHfess tock
took establishment on which they were gong to
and whose interests thcy were going 10 promote.
Mr. Oates chale igcd the witness TO instance single
where the gentlemen mad pronotei LEGISLATION III
had promoted M legislation and had perpetrated no
wclLknown fraud the Government. how woaid IL be
immoral for them engage In the development OF an
invention or an enterprise. win view 10 making them
useful to the pubic an remuneFave to themselves.
The witness agdin replied that he saw no parallel III
MIR Oatcs-Yon sald that the President should have
had more sense than To permit SUI 10 be br"hGh your
belief think very nlSh in the gcntemaHs Nhc
Pre,idents) abilities before the election. ~
Mr.. Dlna-i Thought very highly OF ht abilities IN
some respcct>I think he WAS very bad Democrat and
tried very to beat HIM. came mghty near doing
1t. lie had ught squecze-a plurality OF oiiiy IL
thousand votes IN New iork-and Bn'ch'rd dit that
lLIughterL The democratic parry "onIt pe u gr'hl
deal better OF to-day III my Judgment II he hdu Deeh
Mr. oates inquired If the witness aware tnat
none but nd disposed OF ther Pan lecrlc
Ic sd mat he Enew nothing OF the Bell Company
cept charged cxtravHgnt prices for telephone
think that Government officer should be connected
with the Pau Electric II the Government was 70 he
brought Harry prosecutor IN behalf or the Pan
Electric. but he had no OBJ elton TO Government officers
holding bank Orr..ro ID stock lie maintained that
private patent suit would be the same 's Government
sut IN elect lie dld understand that there was
any sucn practice OF msttutug g vernnent sui is as
had been followed this case and dit not know ta ten
snch suits had been Orlcct by the Government since
1871 he his opluion. but with great mo e9y lie
The Cnairan asked if it his view that the Ator
ney-ener snould resn when such sult was ordcFtd
although ne had taken no p'rt III The oi'icr. . -,
Mr. Dana-Ii 1t WIS impossible for hun to prevent inc
bringing OF such sit IN the name of The Department OF
winch he was tie head. he should have done what any
Cabinet Minister should do whenever anything Is p;o
posed I've that NJ CARDS as entirely improper.
Tue ChaIrmln IN inquired whether Il the law mas made
provision for fhc discharge OF the AttofEeV.uehei
duties officer. wncu the Attorney -encia was
interested. the witness Thought the AV0rEryuch'r'I
should have resigned.
Mr. Dana re oiled that under such statement-wherc
the law clcary provided for such acrcnmstance-thcrc
Ihe Chanman--ls not that tins case pieclscyf
Mr. Dana do not think that 1t j..
The CEnirnan-AItIo evidence IN this case is to the
effect that the Attorney neral refused from the betin
ming to have any connection whatever with TIE appei
on for The suit III the name oi tAe "oVefnn ny anu
and the SolcOr that the SUIT
was ordered by the solicitor General wthon any prev
ION, conversation with Attorne yGeneraL rhc APP
nlcatlon the Attorney 'icncrars departure
The SUIT orccred by the General on MS own
motion II these things 10 trne do you regard the At
torucv General as culpa6le IN permitting sut 10 be
Wr' Dana-I think that the Attorney General should
have protected his department.. >.
The Chairmar-And prevented the applications being
NJ Dana-AnJ prevented the applications being al
lowed. -, - h.. ,,,
I'm some clustic remarks directed AT one another
ing ont OF objection by Mr MIlarI 10 the form Of
Tho charm ans questions Charges OF "DcrvOnsness
and counter charges ironically delivered Of "rciresng
coonrss" passed between the chairman and Mr. Mllard
and Mr. Hanback,. while Mr. Dana apparently enjoying
thn sceuc patiently awaited the continuance of his
animation. lbs was c"ncinted by qu' ston from Nr
iIilard: " If Mr. Garland had found on his return
that they taken advantage OF his absence To nsti
tute suit snould he have discontinued the suit
lett the Department.
Mr. Dama-fhat Is what think
Mr. MniadnIie should nave discontinued i'll
---~----------