Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-07-06
SERIOUS CHARGES,


all papers in the case Mr.. Simonds directed
that carbon copies be made for himself This
was Mr.. Simonds motive for obtaining those
copies.
MIR. Church said that he did not believe that
Secretary Noble had authorized Mr.. Simonds
to procure his copies. Mr.. Church said there
was no excuse for having the copying made by
outside persons. The Office was able to do it
at the time.
CHARGE OF GRAND LARCENY.
There is another aspect to the case of Mr.
simonds, continued Mr.. Church. He had no
right to take those copies without payment
They represented labor by government employees
and government property to the value of S35.
Therefore. under the laws of the District of
Columbia Mr. Simonds has been guilty OF grand
larceny in taking them. and it would
seem to be the duty Of the present
commissioner to call the attention of the
proper officials to the case. Mr.. Church
charged that Mr.. Simonds had also violated Sec
ton 540S Of the Revised Statutes and other
statutes of a similar nature.
Mr.. Church called upon the commissioner to
seize the documents now in the possession OF
Mr.. Simonds, asserting that the papers were
government property wrongfully appropriated
by Mr.. Simonds.
After brief discussion of the point of juris-
diction raised by Judge Payson Mr.. Church
rested his argument and less for luncheon
taken.
MR.. sTARRow's ARGUMENT.
After the recess Mr.. J. J. Starrow. counsel
for Mr.. Freeman, began his argument for the
defense. He proposed, he said, to
state the position of the different
parties and their acts. He said the
commissioner is not called upon to find the
defendants guilty of errors of Judgment. of
hastness. of indiscretion, but must find
them guilty Of gross misconduct; of conduct
SO disgraceful that they are no longer worthy
to enter the commissioners room; of conduct
SO scandalous that they should be stunned.
1t is not presumed that the commissioner
will approve all the practices of his predecessor,
for that is never the case. but, at the
same time. it Is not to be
taken for granted that attorneys are to re dis
barred for following the rules of practice laid
down by his predecessors.
Mr.. Starrow announced his belief that the
Bell Telephone Company had the same right
to copies of the 1884 application that the At
torney General had and that the proceedings
contemplated in court should not continue I'M
less they had such copies. The counsel of the
Bell company asked for papers in that
suit which were plainly necessary to have.
Those copies must be obtained quickly. The
patent Office reported that only three copyists
could be put on the work. and it would take
them twenty-eight days to copy the 425, 900 words
required. Thus the assistance of outside copy
lists was necessitated. For years past 1t has
been customary to permit outsiders to make
copies when the Office force insufficient In
accordance with this custom Mr.. Freeman
simply did his duty in obtaining in the usual
way. the copies which his clients required. He
refuted Mr.. Churchs claim that because this
was the parent of a live application
1t was itself thus kept alive. Because the child
lives the parent lives, was Mr.. Church's argu-
ment, but this is not the rule Of practice by
any means. and never will be, said Mr.. Starrow.
Mr.. Starrow created a stir by the announce
ment that he had in evidence letter from
Church 4 Church acquiescing in the statement
Of the Patent Office that the 1880 July applica-
ton WAS abandoned.
Mr.. Starrow asserted that as a matter of fact
there is no statute guaranteeing the secrecy Of
an application. A caveat is a privileged COM
munication and must be kept secret. but not 80
with an application. 1t is not a privileged
paper.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Starrow's remarks
late in the afternoon Judge Payson addressed
the commissioner in argument Of Mr.. Simonds'
case.
COMMISSIONERS sEYMoUR's STATEMENT
Commissioner Seymour interrupted the pro-
ceedings to say that he would only consider the
case against eA-Commissioner Simonds in
SO far as the charges relate to his
obtaining copies Of papers while commissioner
to use subsequently in practice before
the Department He was free to
say that he did not intend to
bring the grand jury's attention to charges of
Mr.. Simonds having obtained those papers, and
would not criticise the administration OF his
predecessor.