Evening star., 1947-05-13

66EISG6Ey E&tJe1SOu, VINO W&S Oh
| the stand little more than an hour,
Iwas asked BY Charles ]. Margiotti,
lchief counsel for the Garssons, II
May sought to influence you Ii any
way" IN obtaining the 81 award.
Well, don't know what he was
seeking to do Secretary Patterson
replied. 7 can tell you what he
lsaid. He said the company's pro-
duction record was good, and they
were entitled to recognition.
/ It was request to me to inquire
into matter. did inquire into the
matter as I do many times in the
course Of War Department business.
People call for information on vari-
Gus matters .
| Denies Recommending Award.
Mr.. Margiotti went on to ask:
WAS your Recommendation for an
E award. made after you visited
the Batavia company in 1944?s
Secretary Patterson interrupted to
declare 7 made no Recommendation
for an e. award"
He explained that the Batavia
company was one of Is shell manu-
featuring plants he visited in the
|fall OF 1914 to stimulate production.
Under further cross-examination
Secretary Patterson was asked If he
had received many calls from menu
bers of Congress inquiring about
possible 'E" awards.
II had several" he replied.
did the people who called say
their companies had good record?"
Mr.. Margiotti asked.
They all said their companies
had a good record" Secretary Pat
terson. answered. Nobody who
called to, say a company ought to
get an f. award ever said the
company did bad job
The defense. tried lnsuccessfully
to introduce into evidence a mem-
|orandum written by Mr.. Patterson
to the Army Navy "E" Award Board.
presumably concerning the Batavia
company's application
Margiotti Protests.
Before objecting to introduction
of the memo, William A. Paisley,
special prosecutor for the Govern
ment, said to Mr.. Margiotti: May
I see that letter, your lordship."
Mr.. Margiotti, visibly angered,
turned to Justice Henry A. Schwein-
haut and said, II have been called
lot of things in front OF the jury,
but don't want to be called your
lordship.'"
Justice Schweinhaut made no ref
erence to this exchange between op-
posing counsel, but he sustained the
Governments objection to introduc-
ton Of the memorandum.
Later he sustained a defense OBJ
lection when Mr.. Paisley attempted
to introduce copy of a letter from
Gen. Lucius Clay, then stationed at
the War Department. This letter,
Mr.. Paisley indicated, was in reply
to memorandum from Mr.. Pat
terson in connection with Mays
complaint about a cut-back in a
Batavia company contract. Justice
Schweinhaut explained that he was
excluding this evidence, at least
for the time being, because it ap-
parently referred to details not di-
rectly material to this case.
Didn't Ask for Contract.
Under further cross-examination,
Secretary Patterson was asked by
Warren E. Magee, attorney for May: |
did May ever ask you to get a
contract for any one?"
mo SIR" Secretary Patterson an
swered.
Mr.. Royal yesterday testified that
May accused him in September, |
1945, OF having caused the Senate
War Investigating Committee to
look into Mays association with
Carson companies. May later said
he was mistaken, Mr.. Royal testi-
fed, and asked Mr.. Royal, then an
assistant to the Secretary Of. War,
to forget it,"
Charging May took more than
$50, 600 from the Garssonsa in re-
turn for wartime services, Govern t