The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-04-20


Clark about Harris Rogers's application for APP
pointment as House electrician, and about put
ing in the Rogers telephones, but after con-
sultation with Senator Edmunds, the President
pro tenn. of the Senate, Mr.. Clark had refused TO
make the appointment
The chairman inquired il the witness regarded
the stock as gift He replied in ths negative
Five or six persons had come together for the
organization of a company, and they had made
assessments, the first move being to give note
for 81 ,000 which was followed by assessments
of $50 or 800 each He did not regard the in
ventions as having an marketable value; the com
pany was to establish their utility and put them
on the market
Chairman Boyle-Did you contemplate using
your official position for the advantage OF the
enterprise.
The Witness-Not at ALL If I had been a
private citizen / could have done much better
than when in Office. He added that he had no
more idea OF using official influence than of
jumping into the Potomac river with a mill
stone around his neck. The company was SIM
ply an undertaking by half a dozen inlpecunious
gentlemen They had never tried to boom the
business and scatter the stock upon the country;
as least he had never heard Of il
The chairman asked why the witness wanted
to put telephones in the Capitol
The witness replied that they wanted to exhi-
bit the instruments to the public; it was not in
tended to bring them before Congress
In answer to q question by the chairman the
witness said he had never had patent case in
his life.
Mr.. Hall inquired for the witnesses under
standing of the reason for referring applications
to the Interior Department He replied thas it
was simply for information and such suggestions
as they might see proper to make in the prem
ises; it was advisory, of course.
Recurring to his vacation. the witness said
that believing Mr.. Goode would not return in
season, he was about to send for Mr.. Maury.
Under the statute Mr. Goode had tho right to
act as well in his the witness'sl absence as in
his disability, and he had expected, when he had
refused to entertain the application, that the
gentlemen would go at once to Mr. Goode He
did not know that they would follow that course,
and had not suggested it. He had gone to his
home at Hominy Hall, Ark, leaving instructions
to send no departmental letters to him. The
house was Fifteen miles from Little Rock and
seventeen miles from anywhere elSe'
Nh Ranney took up the examination at this
point He inquired whether the witness re-
garded his stock as a purchase, as he had said it
was not gift
The witness replied that it was not precisely
purchase; that it would be difficult to define it in
one word; still, taking the assessments into con-
sderation, it might be called purchase He
was $4OO out By the assessments.
Mr.. Ranney began an inquiry into the con-
tracts of the company, but the witness knew
very little about them.
Mr.. Ranney wished to know to what extent
he had acted as counsel for the company.
The witness replied that, as he had stated he
had looked over the legal papers brought to him
by the others, but had not performed any other
duty as attorney.
Mr.. Ranney took up the legal phase of the
case, and examined the witness at some length
as to his understanding of the issues litigated
in the Dolbear, Drawbaugh and other cases.
The witness had never understood from the
cases he had read that anything more than the
question of infringement had been decided in
each case. He never understood that the issue
was Bells broad claim OF the art of telephony.
Mr.. Ranney-Did Casey Young look mad when
you refused to consider his request to bring suit
Witness-Casey did not look at all pleased.
Continuing, he said that Mr.. Young did not
open his mouth after introducing the gentlemen.
1t was due to ali sides to state the fact that after
after &c mad declined to take any action in the
matter of ordering suit, q number of prominent
gentlemen-legal gentlemen--had written to him
insisting that, notwithstanding his connection
with the Pan-elecrric. it was his duty to have
brought the suit. Some of the most prominent
men in the country had written to that effect.
Mr.. Ranney objected to the statements; he
did not care to 60 into what people had written.
The witness remarked that he was simply
trying to show his position at the time.
Mr. Ranuy wished to know if the witness had
felt that it would be improper to tell the appli-
cant that he was disabled, and refer them to the
Solicitor general
st would not have been improper responded
the witness, but it was question of delicacy
with me-"
Mr. Ranny-Dont you think you were lit
tie oversensitiveq
Witness-No, sir. With me IL was case like
that of Lorenzo Dows man-"Yor will be
damned If you do and be damned if you don't"
Mr. Ranney. referring to the previous testi-
mony concerning the witnesses 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 ONtv Snnpacad th af tho rofy,r
to request the reference OF their application to
the Solicitor general; then they had also threat
ened to appeal to the President.
Mr. Ranney inquired If it had occurred to the
witness AS reason for not telling Goode of the
receipt of the application. that if he had told
him OF his action In refusing to consider the ap-
plication, that Goode might feel bound
to reject it; while If he said nothing Mr.. Goode
would act upon it as an ordinary 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 indicate to have said anything
about it. Later on, referring to the Times
Democrat dispatch about the order for the suit.
received by him at Little Rock the witness said
that, when he received it, he had to think some
little time to recall just what it referred to.
Mr.. Ranney pointed out that what he said
was discrepancy in the testimony relative to
the withdrawal of the original application Van
Berth-yse: had sworn that he told the Attor-
ney-general he intended to make application to
district attorney, while the witness did not re-
member any such statement.
The witness replied that he had sawed Off
the conversation very short, aud he still failed
to recall any such statement,
Mr. Oates-Since you have been Attorney
general. have you done any act or thing, directly
or indirectly to enhance the intereSta of the
Pan electric company either as counsel for them,
as stakeholder or interested party3
The Witness-F cannot call to mind any
thought, action or word of mine, since have
become Attorney-general, that is calculated, in
the remotest degree to increase the value of that
stock, or enhance its value in any way. have
not been at a meeting and have had no confer
ence with the gentlemen connected with it, at
ALL
Mr.. Ostes asked whether it was a very unu-