New-York tribune., 1886-03-21

m aIov rne IunRrur 10 70 uy ueraut in tne Pennsy
@ hn's ' a., co,rv IN rs new snif hold that II We
win have pondlng against me Ie Coi iii re-
said he" ana will win itthat tho decisloh & NJ IN
lieve MIN Giocers) from tire effect OF the HDuuo'ion "
Nlr Ennupy-You mean the Government suisi
Colonel Youus-NO, sir; have no doubt you ""HV '0
He then referred to the Dolbesr and Drnwbaarh cases
pending before tho supreme Court Touching ,ho t"
That have aroadg beon decided no saId nj cIir
siSs siTo." ''J uu''"''O"' '"'''A "''' ..n..,
Ht this point the proceeding, d. Ros"r,s r'qTMSs My
10 10 excused for week was e0nsLdcrru' id Mt;
Ranney seemed to think tie docior shoulu m
near M With Of hs wave OF hs hand "A the
doctor has said oorrobor hate to spoil me sa
pectaOns OF tho persons who are lo0klhg LOT ~
but the doctor has corroborated me IN every dota.
Dr. Rogers rising in his place-And he Id corr"OoAE
The doctor was excused for week. and left the room
Colonel Young resumng turned to the M dnragatorv
circulars and his reply that court ana not
wac the proper BATTLEFIELD As he BG Snt tp bring
suit IN behalf OF the Pan Electric Telephone company
restrain the Bell Company from SIia,tR PnCSih Of the Bo
patents. servics was made on the local & sgcms u W
the Bell COmP@ny-ienry NJ Cooke , dhst AN Sop an
OF Jurisdiction. THAT Il the Issue between us now,
said Colonel Young I'VE are ready to try the case 'u'
some reference had been made tho law Authorizing
Van Benthuy sen. Of tic National Improved Company
had asked why he did not sget Garland to 3rh9 Sus
against the Bell Company witness mao IepIeV Ia Ia
Garland member OF his company its c2Il.l' anu
witness did want him to do it, Van BehII'i @ son
had replied that he Van Benthuysem would u ,d uoIo
was q law OF that nature II should pe enoI,oI, enoI,t
In the meantime the Memphis hill OF the ~
Ind been cd and witness had gone to WashlngtOn W
procure mOdels Van Benthuysen had written m hit', -
ward from Waukesha SPRINGS about his pr9rGsoM ~
consolidate tho Pan Electric ana NAto'al . bad
Companies in the legal proceedings and meeting va" e
been arranged ot tie E3hitt Coohei lounE uon IN
ferr"d 70 Or. Roger5s staement OF Ihe htfor
which he twitucs) reported az saying lhat
ney General Garland h@d consehIeu 10 % niS Se G"cIor
the Bell Company He asserIeu thS' IT, 10 nm.
Lad been ia to the conversation Inc olINH'A
stances hc Younr recalled them were ns Ioi,o"S' 90
! on Nav "a ssI, Dr. Rogers had written letter 90
witness Memphis, in which he sdid no hal eeun tn
decision OF Judge Wallace in the Cunning case III my
! II was held that suit might be 6roush py
the Attorney General to annu patent Inc noCoDr %
is our time. We must mako Garland NE a ii Dltl
at Once to annu the Ben patents And he
upon the receipt Of the letter witness Rad M re-
piled that Mr. Garland could not ne tho niia iu m
to Washington Dr. Rogers told him OF tho letter ne h
Rogers OF the conference with Van Benthuysen at Pitts
! burg. ana that that gentleman had written 10 Iuo
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENT asking him TO bring snlt.
Witness. mad discussed matter with Rogers, VINO was
HuXiou, that suit should be brought NlHess au So
woud have to bring suit. but that II
Uhe Pan Eleotro could take no part IN IL Ah I,u os
a6ont the conference to bo held at the Ebbit House
with the National Improved people on me
tho proposed consolidation ne n"u ,lo cor
Harry to go down ,r ana near tr,,et tHo because s
he had a quarrel with OF the National improved
peopIe-partculqry with Huntington Colohe. toulE & .
impression was That Harry h'Eo'S VI ~
ference II had occurred to witness that u hlEh 90 ol
that hi- company had something 20 do win brIugE e
Government suit and he had cautioned Harry h9-oi9
to say nothing about II. That was on August non
young Rogers lad come back and Sall ma IT. t
knew all about II, and witness had remarked thaI ne
must have learned 1t from Bradley Johnson lnht "as vas
all the conversation witness had had VITA either oI te
Rogrrscs about the sut and he had forgotten the laS'
until reminded Of 1t by 'Harry Rogars's testimony
am positive that never told either OF them that
Attorney. General Garland had agreed TO bring sur
against the Iicl Comp!ny TO annu thtr la'ch'' 7'''
Mr. Yonng, cmphatically. .., ,,.t.,
at u O'clock