New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-05-09
PAN-ELECTRIO DISCLOSURES.
WHAT THE TESTIMONY INDICATES.
AN AGREEMENT TO ~UTIIIzE" THE DEPARTMENT
or JUSTICE.

OF JUSTICE.
Iron A REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE TRIBUNE.l
WASHINGTON, April 15.-Since the investi-
CATION OF the Pan Electric scandal began certainly there
has indication OF desire on the part OF Repub'
loans to take party advantage OF and 1t may be said
to tho credit Of Republican members OF the committee
that they have shown partisan bias. On more than
one occasion. however there have been differences IN
the committee which have seemed to outside observers
to indicate desire the part OF some OF the Demo-
cratic members to take advantage OF techncaites for
the benefit OF Mr. Garlsnd and his associates but as
whole the committee has appeared to DO willing 10
have a thorough investigation. Tho inquiry has pro-
ceeded far enough already to show pretty concusivey
that every statement heretofore made In THE TRIBUNE In
regard to the matter substantially correct 70 pass
once from tho question OF prOprety involved In the
acceptance Of gift stock by Senators Garland ana
Harris and the question to whether or not Gaaho OF
Harris was oupable for giving his legal opinion In order
TO induce men to invest money in the Pan-Eiectrlo
patents 10 the question to whether or not the rst
the Governn ent suit to annul the Bell patent
was the OF previous understanding 1t impor-
ant this stage OF tie Investigation to set forth certain
facts,
Neither Young Harris, Johnston, Garland nor Atkins
has successfully impeached the testimony OF j. W.
Rogers or j. Harris Rogers both OF whom have testi-
fed that Young informed them before the suit was
brought that Garland had promised but that the order
to be issued by Goode.
about July 10, 1888, bill was nled Dy inc ran
Electric Company Memphis to annu the Bell patent.
No effort has made by the Pan Electric Company
to prose cute suit On about July 10 iOung-whO
had been by Harris TO Pttsbure to consult with the
representatives OF the National Improved Company.
which and the Pan Electric Company there had
been bitter fght-entered into verbal agreement with
President Van Bcnthuysen to join the forces OF tho
National Improved and Pan Electric Companies to fight
the Bell Company. On July H. according to this agree
meD Van Benthuysen in writing. requested the Attor-
ney General TO bring suit, In behdV ofhe National
Imp,'orcd Company. and in the name OF the United
States, annul the Bell patent AS Dr. Rogers in his
letter of Sci tember 49, 1885, TIE TRIBUNE declared,
the use OF the OF tho National Improved Company
WAS blind, apparently relieve MI. Garland Of any
delicacy that he might feel He entertained the app-
cation Of Van Benthuysen to the extent OF referring 10
the Interior Department for report That was on July
Ia Only sixteen days Later. and In the very hottest OF
the hot season, Van Benthuysen, Young, Charles r.
Huntingdon Gautt Won Briesen, Senator Harris and
other persons interested in the Pttsburg agreement
turned up in Washington On the next day. July 81,
several of Them including Young and Van Benthnysen
went MI Garland In his letter - the President
Mr.. Garland says that they asked him TO institute suit
tor the benefit OF his company In the name of the
United states and that he declined and also that he
supposed they would make application to have tho
subject referred to the Solicitor General or the PTesi
dent. Mr. Garlands testimony before the committee
confirmed the statements n his letter; but he explained
his remark the application in behaf oil the
Pan-Electric Company was can Inference" and not |
the statement Of "a fact" within his knowledge
The applicants retired in good order, but Van Benthuy
sens attorney, The day. went TO the Patent Office
and wndre Van Benhuysen's APPLICATION Of July H.
which had been referred by the Attorney General on
July IA. The Commissioner Of Patents indorsed uron |
the ap LEGATION that it withdrawn upon the request
the and in accordance with the views OF tho
Attorney General. ON August 4, los5, the verbal
agreement between the Pan Electric aud the National
m ed
and Van Benthuysen at Pttsbure Was reduced to
separated day two later ohly TO meet almost imme
datrly aiterward In Memphis Every step they took
after conference with Garland on July 81 WAS exactly
such men would take who were acga'ed by definite
purpose and assured OF its success Casey Young him
self has testified that when they left Washington they
had made up their minds whero they would bring
tue suit. They halted between Memphis and New
o. leans, and the testimony OF Young and seixas
although contradictory oil some other points agrees as
to the reasons Why Memphis was selected. On Anens,
left Washington, Goode was at the helm arrangements
supplementary agreement had been signed and the
bill in equity had been prepared by Casey Young CAN'T
aud Bockwith. From that date events moved rapidly
August 31-Casey Young is at Jackson, Tenn, in
consultation With McCoTy whose Application to have
the slit brought dated on the same day ,,.,. .
up IN Washington In Goodies Office The application OF
sedeuber S~co~ie orders tho suit to he brought by
McCorry and appoints Casey Young, Can't. Beckwh
and Wright special counsel of the United states In
September 9The bill prepared beforehand by the
coparceDers is fled at Memphis.
September l5This bill is nourished in the face OF
United states Circuit Judge Bond IN Baltimore. accom-
panied with demand for stay Of proceedings in the
suit of the Bell Company against GaTland's company
aud the name ana auhoiity OF Attorney General Gar
land invoked by D -tricf Attorney stirling and Brad
lev T. Johnson president the Baltimore Pan Electric
COMPANY The conclusion is Irresistible tnat between
July = anl September and subsequently the Depart
ment Of Justice uscd, under tho Pan Electric
Improved agreement. TO promote the interests
OF the cOmpany in winch the Attorney General ras
aud to break down the Boil Company.
The testimony ihns far obtained shows also that the
Pau Electric people from the beginning meant to
strike the Bell COMPANY and compel 1t to buy them
of. After the unsuccessful attempt 10 negotiate
directly they did not despair but entered into contract
A. late January Is, IS, with Dr. Wellington Adams,
electrical expert who undertook to furnish expert
testimony in Their behalf He to receive stated
sum in cash and II In addition contingent upon he
sue Of litigation against tho Bell Compsnv. But he
was to receive the contingent fee also If the Bell Com
pany should buy of the Pan-Eccric Company still
August. 1885, when the secret agreement was
made between tho Pan and National Improved Com
paes stipulated that neithcr party should with
iraw from the litigation consent 10 any compromise
without tho consent OF the other rarity. This meant
hat if the Bell Company bought of of the parties TO
ho agreement II must bay of both OF them.