St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-04-20

suit, Mr.. Garland denied all knowledge of
1t, stating that he had never said one word
concerning it to any one, declining even TO
TALK To THE PRESIDENT
about it. As to the question of propriety
there was no more improperly in his posi-
tion than in the case of congressman hold
Ing railroad stock; his only regret was that
it had not panned out better. He denied
that the stock In his possession was gift,
stating that five or six persons had come
together for the organization OF company
and they had made assessments, the first
move being to give note for 81 1000, which
was followed by assessments OF $50 or 500
each. He did not regard the inventions as
having any marketable value. the company
was to establish their utility and put them
on the market.
Chairman Boyle-Did you contemplate us
ing your official position for the advantage of
the enterprise?
The witness-Not ut all. If had been a
private citizen could havs done much better
than In Office
He added that he had no moro idea of
using official influence than of jumping into
the Potomac river with milestone around
his neck. The company was simply an un-
dertaking by half dozen impecunious gen.
tlemen. They had never tried to boom the
country. Atleast he had never heard of it.
The chairman asked why the witness
wanted to put the telephones in the capi-
tOl. The witness replied that they wanted
TO exhibit the instruments to the public; it
was not intended to bring them before con-
gress. In answer to a question by the
chairman the witness said he had never had
a patent case in his life. Mr.. Hall inquired
for the witness understanding of the reason
for referring applications to the interior
department. He replied that it was SIM
ply for information and such suggestions as
they might see proper to make in the prem
ises- 1t was advisory of course.
At this point Mr.. Ranney took up the eX-
animation of the witness, who in reply to a
question said that in the light of the assess
ments and the fact that he was $500 out the
telephone stock might be regarded as a
purchase. Hehad not referred any one to
Solicitor General Goode, because he did not
want to be
MIXED UP IN THE MATTER
at all. Mr.. Ranney wished to know if the
witness had felt that it would be improper
to tell the applicants that he was disabled
and refer them to the solicitor general.
sit would not have been improper" re-
sponded the witness, ''but it was a question
of delicacy with me-
Mr.. Ranney-Don't you think you were
little over-sensitive?
Witness-No sir, with me it was case like
that Lorenzo Dow's man-'You will be id
if you do-and be id If you don't.
Laughter.
Mr.. Ranney referred to the previous testi-
mOny concerning the witness refusal to
hear the application and subsequent
search for the missing law. asked how he
knew that another application would be
made. The witness replied that he did
not know that, he only supposed that the
parties would return to request the refer
ence of their application to the solicitor
general, then they had also threatened to
appeal to the president. Mr.. Ranney in
quired if it had occurred to witness as rea-
son for not telling Goode of the receipt of
the application, that if he had told him of
his action in refusing to con-
slider the application that Mr.. Goode
might feel bound to reject it, while
if he did nothing Mr.. Goode would act upon
it as an original application and might
grant the request. The witness responded
firmly in the negative. AS Mr.. Ranney
still pressed the witness for his reason in
remaining silent, he remarked that after
what had occurred, it seemed to him that it
was with the utmost prOpriety that he had
kept silent. He thought it would have
been extremely indelicate to have said any
thing about it.
Mr.. Oates-Since you have been attorney
general, have you done any act or thing,
directly or indirectly to enhance the interests
of the Pan Electric company, either as coun-
sci for them, as stOckholder or interested
party.
The Witness-I cannot call to mind any
thought action or word Of mine since be-
came attorney general, that is calculated in
ha IN. if,ar of
that stock or enhance its value in any way.
Lave not been at a meeting, aud have had no
conference with the gentlemen connected
with it at all
Mr.. Oakes asked whether it was a very
unusual thing for q district attorney to
make such an application, to which the
witness replied in the negative. AS the
committee had no further questions to put,
the examination Of the attorney general
was concluded at this point and the COM
mittee adjourned until Wednesday.