Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-05-27
Mr.. SIMONDS' REPLY.
Full Text Of the Reconnaissance
Sworn Answer.
HIS OFFICIAL ACTIONS.

His Denials OF the Allegations Contained
In the Charges Filed by Messrs. Church
. Church - Chief Clerk Bennett's Sworn
Reply So Far - He IL Affected.
The fuif sworn answers OF ex-Commissioner
Simonds and Chief Clerk Bennett have both
been filed with the commissioner Of patents
to the charges made by Church & Church and
are as follows:
MR. sIMoNDs PLEADING.
Now comes said VIM. E. Simonds, and for
himself, and as an answer to the rule to show
cause, &C., this day entered by the commits
noner OF patents In said proceeding, says that
he denies that during the months of February
and March. 1888, upon the request Of said
Foster d Freeman, by the consent and allow
snce Of respondent, any files or drawings of
the alleged pending application Of said Daniel
Drawbaugh and the records Of ex-parte
proceedings hereunder were laid open to
the inspection Of said Foster 4 Freeman.
or OF other persons not in the employment Of
the government. but hired and paid by the
American Bell Telephone Company, or BY said
Foster Freeman, and denies that said Foster
q Freeman or any other persons not duly en-
pioyed by the ONCE were permitted to
make any copies Of the said pending Draw
baugh application and Of the records and pro-
cssdings thereunder,s s alleged in said petition.
AS TO NoS-oFrIcIAL PERSONS.
That a. to the alleged examination and copy
ing Of the said papers by the ''non-ofscial
persons" shown on page 2 Of the petition,
a. sverred, with the knowledge and consent
OF said Simonds." respondent says that
he denies that any such copying or examine
ton by said "non-of6cial personst' was done or
had by or with his knowledge or consent. and
AYERS that he knew nothing Of or had aught to
do with their doing any such work (by them
done), a. alleged, or in any way whatever. as to
any OF the files and records named or included
In the description Of files and records In said
petition set out
Respondent denies that in any way Whatever
we're there made and delivered to him certain
other copies or any copies, Of the files, draw
ings and records pertaining to the said Draw
baugh applications. wrongfully Appropriated by
respondent to his own use and now wrongfully
in his possession.
Respondent, further answering, SAYS that no
copy. Of any papers belonging to said Draw
baugh files in any way was ever
made; 70 far as respondent knew
at the time, or now knows, except
by proper parties in the patent Office,
nor, except in strict compliance with
law and rules Of the office, and he AYERS that no
copy Of any paper belonging to any Of the
Drawbaugh files referred to was ever delivered
or furnished to any one except in strict accord
ance With the rules Of the patent Office to his
knowledge or belief.
Denies that any collision or conniyance was
ever had or ever existed between himself
and said Foster Il Freeman to the inspec-
ton by said firm or either OF them Of said
files and papers in the Drswbaugh applics-
tons, or the copying Of them or any part Of
them as alleged; and. further, that be has no
knowledge or information whatever that either
OF them ever saw either the said papers and
files or any copies or any part Of them
FORMAL REQUEST FOR COPIES
Respondent shows that early in February,
1898, q formal request WAS made in the usual
way to him as commissioner by an attorney o,
the American Bell Telephone Company for
copies Of the file Of the Drawbaueh application
Of 1884 and other papers; that il was rep
resented to respondent that a bill had been
fled by the United States in the United States
circuit court in Boston. Mass.. to cancel the
Berliner patent, and that all the copies OF
papers asked for were necessary for the de-
PENDANTS use in said litigation, then and
still pending; that they were needed speedily,
and he then believed and still believes
that said request was made in good
faith by the said attorney. Having some
oOuOt d9 70 W0St06r QnQeI Inc fule0 tQe SAID
company was entitled to have copies Of the files
Of the Drawbaugh application OF 1884, and
being pressed with other official business, pre-
venting at the time full consideration Of the
question. respondent, to save time, in case
he should ultimately hold that the CON-
pany was entitled TO the said papers.
and on promise BY the said attorney that the
patent Office should be paid for such copies
whether they should ultimately be allowed
to be furnished or not-gave directions to
the proper subordinate in the bureau to
have the requested copies Of all papers.
including those Of the Drawbaugh application
Of 1884, prepared and paid for. but not in any
to do by respondent
COPIES DENIED.
This work WAS done. On full consideration
respon dent concluded that the said company
was not entitled to have the said copies of the
Drawbau Oh file Of 1884, and be 90 decided, and
made a formal decision on the question,
on second formal application for these
copies, which appears OF record in the bureau.
Not only did he never give any orders for the
delivery Of these copies, but he AYERS tina,
none OF the agents or attorneys Of the Ameri-
can Bell Telephone Company ever saw them
or the original files Of the 1884 appli-
cation Those copies still remain in the Gus
tody Of the proper officer Of the bureau. He
has no knowledge Of the manner in which
the work of preparing those copies was done,
as 1t was under the direction Of the proper
subordinate. and he believed and still be-
lieves It wss properly done. and that no exam
ination or inspection of said file of 1884 was
made BY any one not properly in the employ OF
the patent Office and entitled to do what was
done. And SO, be absolutely denies tina,
any copy OF the said file: Of the
made, and AYERS that no copy Of any file wrap
md unit anti NJ lsnsS ., -