The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-05-18

New York, May 1S.-After the chief attorney of the New York Telephone Company had described at length the police practice of tapping tele- phone wires, laying emphasis on the fact that this is permitted only to de- tect crime and never for commercial purposes, it was brought out before the Thompson committee yesterday that the telephone of Seymour & Sey- naour. lawyers, in the Equitable build ing, had recently been tapped by the police.
 Thereupon John S. Seymour of Nor walk, a partner in the firm, took the witness stand and declared that their wire could not have been ''cut IT" on for the purpose of detecting crime. MT. Seymour, remarked significantly that his office had been involved in large munitions contract for the Allied Pow CTS, asserted that the news of the po- lice activity on his telephone came as a tsrevelation.'
 Lawyer Surprised at Revelation.
 The question of recent tampering with Seymour & Seymour telephones came to public notice few weeks ago. MT. Seymour, on the stand to-day, de- clared that even when private detec- tive agency admitted having put a ''dictaphone'' in his office he did not believe it.
 
 had tapped our wire I wouldn't have believed t,'' said MT. Seymour when informed by Frank Moss. chief coun- sel to the committee, that hs firm was on the list of $50 cases covering about two years past which was supplied by the telephone company yesterday.
 @We have hadA . large commercial transaction regarding munitions fol the Allies, in which large interests were invoIved,' declared MT. Seymour who was Co1nnssioner of Patents al Washington under President Cleve- land "Recently we held conferences at our offices. If there was any tap ping of our telephone will say with out reservation that it was not to de tect crime
 Morgan Firm Interested
 Tn reply to a question from MT Moss, the witness said he thought the Morgan interests were in some way connected with the war contract, but the contract itself had been executed when the conference took place re- gently.
 MT. Seymour declared that his firm was endeavoring to find out who em. p1oyed the private detective agency which admitted having tarnpered witI his office and acknowledged that Dis frict Attorney Swain had promised action if a. complaint were made bs the law firm.
 s.The interest of this committee" ex plained MT. Moss, lis to find ou whether the police tapped your wire ng crime. when in reality it was no I for that reason.
 No Crime to Detect.
 .sOf course it wasn't to detect any crime if the wire was tapped at all' returned MT. Seymour. There woulC be no need for anything like that il connection with this matter or any oth | CT case we've handled. It comes dowr to this, that one of two people desired information. There could have, onl. been two who were interested ~ant we're doing all we can to get at the truth of the matter
 | Under questioning on the subject ol two people, MT. Seymour changed i to. two corporations,'' explaining fur ther that the curious, in any event could only seek information for ''com- mercial or business reasons.''
 Swayze Testifes.
 The committee started after te1e- phone ''wire tapping practices yes terday by calling John l. swayze ! general counsel of the New York Te1e- phone Company, who yesterday supplied the investigators with . list of $50 police tapping incidenti 1 in the last two years. MT. Swayze explained to-day that te'wire tapping | ..censoring'' and bridging over, were synonymous terms.
 After telling that there has beer continuous tapping by public au thorities. particularly in the last two years, the telephone lawyer said i had been done specifically through ths Police Department.
 | F"I don't find any records showing that any other city department hai asked for the tapping privilege, witt possible exception of requests from the District Attorneys offices. in Nev York and Brooklyn quite a way back. presume the District Attorne. may have done some, tapping year ago, but our records date back 9nl. about two years said the witness. i Dates Back to 1895.
 The placing of s.taps" on telephone dates back to 1885, MT. Swayze ex l plained, but until recent years re lquests came from the auth critics or l ally and rather informally. Now tn company insists on an order approve, by the Police Commissioner in ever, case of s.cutting in. The telephon