Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-06-24
1T STOPPED SHORT.
The Prosecution in the Patent Office
Scandal Case.
FAILURE TO IDENTIFY CERTAIN COPIES
Originals. if Produced, Would Be
Inspected by Defense.
DENIALS BY THE DEFENSE.

The patent office investigation opened with
lively gait this morning and soon developed an
interesting condition.
At the outset the prosecutors made move
which If it had not been checkmated by the Wig
orous objections of the defendants might have
turned search light upon the somewhat
obscure situation.
This was the second attempt Of the prosecu-
ton to get at certain line Of evidence sup
posed to be vital evidence, and each time the
defense thwarted the attempt by objecting long
and loud.
The prosecution yesterday produced ribbon
and carbon copy of a live and pending Draw
baugh application OF 1884, which were alleged
to have been made by the outside typewriters
for the defendants
The defense had previously contended that
these copies never left the custody Of the patent
Office. and that before they were delivered 1t
was found that it would be improper to give
them to outsiders.
The prosecution. however, having learned
that triplicate copies Of certain papers had
been made, wanted to ascertain II the three
copies we're of this live application Of 1884, and
II SO what became Of the third copy.
Upon this showing appeared to hang all the
III" anu the pronts. without this showing the
prosecution seemed to think further investiga-
ton upon this line would be proiitless.
Ihereupon the carbon and ribbon copies
were produced to be identified by the
persons who performed the copying. The
defense quickly gave notice that il the
copies were produced in evidence they should
demand to read them page by page. This
threat frightened the prosecution, for they
could not bear to have the opposition read their
pending case, and Commissioner Seymour
ruled that he could not prevent such inspection.
The defense, seeing the point they had gained,
insisted upon their stand and the prosecution
withdrew the copies.
REPORT THAT WAS NOT READ.
This morning the prosecution called upon
Maj Emory, chief Of the interference division,
to tell something about the copies Of the 1884
pplication while they remained in his custody.
The prosecution offered in evidence a written
report which had been made by Maj. Emory to
Commissioner Seymour upon this subject.
This report was read by the defense and
seemed to create CONSERVATION in their ranks.
They raised a loud cry OF objection to the in
PRODUCTION of the paper original evidence.
''If 1t is introduced as evidence" said Judge
Payson. 1--WE will deny some of the statements
therein" -f
Commissioner Seymour excluded the report
as evidence and refused to permit THE STAR
reporter to read it on the ground that evidence
which is excluded should not be made public
Thus for the second time the delicate subject
OF the 1854 application was avoided.
MR.. scoTT's TESTIMONY.
Mr.. Alex. ii. Scott, assistant chief in the
drauGhtsman's division, was then sworn. He
testified that since last March twelve copies of
Drawbaugh applications were ordered to be
made BY the chief clerk and were made in his
Office. The written order of the chief clerk for
the copies was offered in evidence
Mr. Edward II Navlor boolkoarar in {bo
finance division, was next put on the stand. He
was questioned to ascertain il there was anv-
thing on his books to show if Foster Free
man or the Bell Telephone Company had been
charged with or paid for copies Of the 1884
application.
He testified that there was no such charge on
his books.
ME-. CHURCH MAKES A STATEMENT
At this point the proceedings took a new
turn. Mr.. Church asked to make statement.
1t has been shown, he said, that on two differ
ent occasions formal requests were made BY the
Bell Telephone Company to obtain copies of
pending Drawbaugh applications, which re-
quests were denied. There is now. however. in
the possession Of the patent office ribbon
copy and a carbon copy Of pending Draw
baugh application, that Of 1884, which were
made b. Miss Bitter.
Mr.. Church then reviewed the proceedings
Of yesterday, when the commissioner would
under pledge of keeping them inviolate from
inspection By the opposition. Mr.. Church
stated that in view of that fact he is preclu6ed
from offering further evidence.
1--WE are, therefore, said Mr.. Church. "com-
PEELED by the situation to request that your
honor, acting as the head of the bureau shall
advise yourself further as to who made the
copies of the said 1884 application now in your
possession and as to whether they were made
by any unofficial person or persons and as to
the authority under which they were made"
SOMETHING OF SENSATION
This announcement created something Of q
sensation. Mr.. Church quickly added, how
ever. that he did not wish to be understood as
abandoning the charges. He simply wanted
the commissioner himself to ascertain facts
which he himself could not elicit without e1-
posing the secret file of his clients.
He added that he would withdraw the charge
against Mr. Foster personally, but would not
withdraw it against him q member of the
firm OF Foster Freeman.
Mr.. Church here rested his case and the de-
fense took charge
TESTIMONY FOR THE DEFENSE.
Mr.. Charles L. Foster sworn and testified
to having no connection whatever with the
procurement of the copies of the papers.
Mr.. Freeman of the firm of Foster Il Free
man took the stand He said that his firm
wanted certain certified copies Of papers in the
patent office. and he called upon Mai. Emory
for them. 1t was stated that the Office force could
not get up the copies. and Maj. Emory suggested
the employment of outside typewriters to do
the work Misses Lonyfellow and Bitter we're
employed by Mr.. Freeman to copy such papers
as Maj. Emory should give them. He did not
have any further communication with them
Mr.. Freeman declared that he had never seen
the 1884 application nor any copy or portion
of it and knew nothing of such copy.
MR.. FREEMAN CROss-EXAMINED.
Upon cross-examination by Mr.. Church Mr.
Freeman said that he did not know what Draw
baugh files were being copied. long and te-
dious cross-examination here followed without
any material evidence being adduced Mr.
Freeman read several letters from Mr. Starrow
of Boston, stating that he had never received
copies of Drawbaugh applications, except ap-
plica tions which were abandoned and which it
was competent to copy.
A ROLAND FOR AN OLIVER
During the crcss-examnation reference was
made by'Mr. Church to the fact that Mr.. Free
man left the service OF the patent Office, where
he was employed an examiner. and soon
thereafter entered the service OF the Bell Tele.
phone Company.
When this statement was made Mr.. Starrow
cross-examined Mr.. Church and elected the