Evening star., 1941-03-05
u. ). RestsCase
In Antitrust
Medical Trial
Defense Prepares
To Meet Charges
Against 20 Doctors
BY HAROLD B. ROGERS.

and four medical organizations pre-s
pared today to answer the Govern
ment's charge that organized medi-
cine conspired in violation of the
Sherman Antitrust Act to destroy
Group Health Association, a medical
cooperative here.
After a month of trial, the Gov
ernment rested its case at PAT pm.
yesterday. Announcing that coun- y
sci on both sides wished TO do some
work on the case outside the court
room, Justice James M Proctor re-
cessed thetrial until tomorrow
morning at 10 o'clock.
Defense lawyers refused to divulgs
their strategy when the trial re-
sumes. 1t was expected, however,
they would file motions, including
one or more for directed verdicts.
In closing the Governments case
professionally" John Henry Levin,
in charge of the prosecution, asked
permission to introduce additional
evidence if this is found necessary.
He also served notice that the Gov
ernment would file motion asking
that evidence admitted against each
defendant be equally binding on all
defendants.
Asks for Audience.
The last piece of prosecution evi-
dence placed before the jury was
letter by DR.. Thomas E. Mat
tingly, defedant, written to Will
liam R. Beall, foreman of the spe-
cial grand jury in November, 1898,
about month before the jury re-
turned its indictment against de-
fendants
On insistence of Defense Attor-
ney William E. Leahy, the evidence
was ruled by Justice Proctor to be
admissible only against DR.. Mat
tingly, and not against the other
defendants.
In the letter Dr. Mattingly de-
clared the grand jury could not in
justice, honesty or fair play ignore
my plea as a reputable physician, a
native son and a lifelong resident
of the District Of Columbia, for a
hearing"
He asked for the audience "even
should the public prosecutor OBJ
ject, because" he added, "I am
fearful of the belief that he will
use every device at his command to
keep you from learning the whole
truth, undistorted by political pre-
judice and intellectual dishonesty"
1T is my personal opinion" he
continued, that if the public prose-
cutor had knowledge or even a well
founded suspicion that the teSti-
mony of a witness subpoenaed be-
fore you might awaken or break
his case he would not be above the
legalistic trickery of attempting to
persuade you that the status of the
witness had already been investi-
gated and such testimony as they
might be able to give is both irrele-
want and inconsequential'
Faith in Civic Honesty.
Because 1 have an abiding faith
in your civic honesty, your demo-
cratic concept of justice and your
stanch, incorruptible courage, I
promise. if allowed to appear before
you and under your sovereign pro-
| lection, to acquaint you with what
is in the hearts and minds of this
/ community Of physicians which has
motivated us to do as we have done.
I am sure you will agree that, before
| you can with honesty and conscience
indict us, you must make every ef-
| fort to ascertain the true reasons
/ behind this concerted but spontane-
GUS action Of a preponderant ma
| jority of the physicians Of Washing
ton. Only when and if you have
weighed and considered those mo-
! tiveS can you return a true and un-
corruptible verdict Because I trust
you, have faith in you, I promise, if
given an opportunity to appear be-
| fore you, to truthfully answer with
out any evasion or reservation what
| soever.
That you might know beyond any
reasonable doubt, and despite any
| objections on the part of the public
prosecutor, that my testimony is both
relevant and consequential, frankly
admit the following acts of profess
sional leadership, successfully &C
compliShed:
81. personally raised the question
and forced the issue of compelling
wavering or undecided hospitals to
deny courtesy privileges to staff
members Of G. H. A. I likewise sue
cesSfully argued the point in an eX-
! ecutive session of the medical society
that we had ample precedent to
discipline any member of our society
found guilty of secretly aiding G. H.
A. in obtaining its objectives by
subterfuge.
Feared for Privileges.
"The threat of this action alone
anjoined the clandeStine cooperation
of several members suspected of such
cooperation, though it must be
noted that these members were never
openly named because such suspi-
! cion we had was hearsay evidence
only, and as such was not admissible.
20. I successfully used my position
as member Of the Medical Council
to prevent DR.. Raymond Selders
| &C H. A. surgeon) from receiving
courtesy privileges at Sibley Hospi-
| tai.
u L w 90 C1AC ddbAlOl' oPOAlOOl dlAN
| lone defender of the defeated sub
stltute motion which would have
punished DR.. Scandifho CDR. Mario
Scandiffio, now medical director Of
G. H. A. with suspension instead
of expulsion from the medical So
ciety
Prior to the submission Of this
evidence DR.. Francis x. Richard
son, formerly of G. H. A, testified
that he had resigned from G. H. A.
after a conversation with two doc
tors, who we're members of the
medical society, at Sibley Hospital.
did you resign from G. H. A."
Mr.. Levin asked him, because you
were afraid you would lose your
hospital privileges?"
YES" the witness replied.
Anucostiu Hiqh Recital