Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1886-07-08
PAN-ELEGTRIC
Three Separate Reports to the
House from the Investi-
eating Committee.
Mr.. Garland Defended by the Demo-
cratic and Censured by the
Republican Members
Washington telegram l

Washington telegram.1
The Pan-Electric Telephone Committee pre-
sents three reports to the House, neither of
which is signed by majority OF the committee.
Chairman Boyles report is signed by himself and
Messrs. Oates, Eden and Hall-all Democrats
Mr.. Ranney's report has the signatures Of him.
self and Messrs. Mllard, Hanback,, and Moffatt
AL Republicans. Mr.. Halo submits q report
signed by himself alone.
THE DEMOCRATIC REPORT.
The Democratic members Of the committee,
In their report, say:
What DIR. Rogers offered to Messrs. Carlisle
Snd 9t5srs MSs stook IN an ana
inventions, In their then condition OF no value
whatever and only to- be made valuable
by the joint effort of the Rogerses and
those who joined them in the under
taking. The property might turn out TO be
worth much or nothing. 1t had no commercial
value The evidence does not show that these
gentlemen were admitted by the Messrs. Rogers
with any expectation of profting by their official
positions or official action. Gen. Atkins, the
party to whom they made the proposition, was wa,
aid from him. 1t was Gen. Atkins who spoke
TO Senator Harris, so that the Rogerses did not
select him because he was Senator. The right
to select the other three was given absolutely
TO Senator Harris and no condition was imposed
that he should select persons in office. AT that
time Mr.. Garland was not thought Of for Attor-
ney General. In view OF his previous life and
character it was not thought he would use his
official power to forward private enterprise in
which he was interested. Casey Young was
named by Rogers. He was not TO appear in
Congress until nearly a year after. Gen.
Johnston was not in Office and did not expect to
be-"
OF Solicitor General Goodies treatment Of the
application to bring the Memphis suit the report
says;
dicted, but IL fully supported by all the wit
nesses who testified about the same matters.
He was not connected with any telephone com;
had fafar fff an ind N
by the suit and had no knowledge OF any pre-
vious application. He had not been informed OF
Mr.. Garland's connection with q telephone COM
pany and had he been that should have made
no difference in his conduct In the view OF the
committee, while II would have been better TO
have let the application take the usual course
by referring 1t to the Interior Department, still
his failure to do so was at most only mistake"
In conclusion, the committee finds that there
was sufficient reason and authority for bringing
the suits, but it expressly refrains from at
tempting to find whether the Bell patents We're
obtained fraudulently, or whether Bell was the
inventor of the speaking telephone.
THE REPUBLICAN REPORT.
The report of the Republican members cites
testimony to show how the Pan Electric Com
pany was organized and three and half million
OF its stock given to gentlemen for the use OF
their names and reputation The opinion OF
patents do not infringe the Bell patent, is
quoted with the statement that it had been got
because the Pan-Electrc could not sell rights
without it and it was, as it intended to be. the
inducement which led large numbers of persons
to pay in money, part of which was divided
sRs fMm Ne S srnd Ana hts associates AT tho
| struments did infringe on the Bell patent. Tho
report then refers to the postal telegraph bill as
explaining the motives OF the Pan Electric organ
izers and states that So 900 600 Of the stock as
held by members OF Congress, because IL was
expected that the bill would be a subject OF leg
islation. 1t is charged that the Pan-Electric
people, including Mr.. Garland tried to get Con-
gressional Inducements for their scheme, and
the evidence is cited where it touches upon the
nffOr f0 ha nj
Rogers as House Electrician. 1t is alleged that
Senators Garland and Harris and General john
ston busted themselves personally to accom-
plish this. Mr. Young put up telephone In
his commttee-room, and this says the report
was pretty near to a Congressional indorse-
ment."
Touching the Attorney General the report
holds that IL was his duty, considering how
much he was interested, to make sure by calling
Mr. Goodies attention to the application that
whenever il did come It should receive the full
est and most impartial investigation, according
TO all the usege3 and practice OF the office. The
report says that he should have been solicttous
enough Of the honor of the department to have
made certain that this was done, but he did not
The report continues:
admit of doubt that the Solicitor General, act
ing as Attorney General, was by some means
led 10 grant this application without the usual
reference or inquiry, without any pretense OF
competent examination, with unexampled
speed, and in violation Of the practice of the de-
partment.
aIn an ordinary case such action would be
held to be positive proof of fraud at least proof
Of gross negligence, which in n person OF his
position is equivalent 10 fraud mhere is Is
be applied here. 1t can not be forgot
ten that this request, granted in so ex-
traordinary and so unbecoming manner. was
a request in which the head Of the Department
of Justice and n Senator OF the United States,
who came in person to the Solicitor General to
| inquire about it. and seemingly urged speed
and other Government officials, for two years
had-and had notoriously had-a vast pecuniary
interest.
puted, no jury would hesitate It is enough,
however, TO say that it cannot be tolerated that
the business OF tho Government can be so con-
Quoted. It cannot escape observation that Sem
ator Harris and Mr. Casey Young acted just as
men would act IL already assured Of what was
being asked, and that the conduct OF the So
| licitor General is most easily accounted for on
the assumption that he understood the matter
in advance, and had predetermined upon his
| course OF action.
-The best that can be said of him attorney
General Garlandl is that he lent himself to this
scheme because he got his stock for nothing II
| he was not active in il himself he suffered his
name and influence to be used by others. He
was then only Senator Of the United States. He
was next placed at the head Of the Department
received the half-milion OF stock wanted
now to borrow the name OF that de-
partment and get its Inducements; then
representative of his company asked for it.
! Some men would easily have found course for
themselves. Ho took one also but his asso-
| ciates who knew him and speculated on
his character. were certain they would get
what they wanted--and they did. His intel
| lgence told him there were two things he
| should not permit and then his vacillating
| will let him argue that he might stand aside
and see his offico do them for his benefit. He
| had not the strength TO deny what his
| ciates asked, nor to return the stock and
| cease to bo associate he had not the bold
| ness to do personally what they thought was a
| fair service for the stock he kept. But it was
| done by his department as such thing never
| was done before. The evidence is more aggres-
| sive, however, and the facts according 10 ordi-
| nary rules of law are direct and positive and
| unless controlled are conclusive proof that all
| ex-parto Government action at least was affect
| ed by the influence Of those interests the
| knowledge of them"
Mr.. HALE's REPORT.
Mr. Halo MOI in his individual report denies
| that the gentlemen Interested I'm the Rogers
company over intended to use their official posi-
| tions in its behalf. He holds that the opinion
| delivered by Mr.. Garland was that of an attor-
ney simply. The general report estimates the
| cost OF trial ut 100000 Mr.. Hale thinks that
public curiosity should not be pandered 10 at
| such cost and, i'm short, that there's nothing
| in IL"