Show MORGAN ANGRY AT A RUSE USED BY A PROCESS SERVER Admittance Gained to the Millionaires Mansion by bythe bythe the Making of False Representations Magn Magnates tes Counsel Says it Was Ungentlemanly and That His QUent Would Have Cume Voluntarily Kw roRK RK h the ot o a subpoena on en J PIerpont Morgan in 10 the suit ot of Peter Power against the Northern Pa Pacific ettic Railroad company Francis Lynde Stetson counsel for Mr Morgan to today today day made the following statement In several of the newspapers of thIs morning have aTe appeared Items suggest suggestIng suggesting Ing that the counsel representing Peter Power In hie suit nit against the Northern Pacific Railway company have found or anticipated some dl difficulty In scour securIng scouring Ing the attendance as a witness ot of either J T P Hogan or some orne member of his firm Arm ArmAny Any such suggestion on whether or not u as Intended is defiance in or of the facts and without justification what whatever whatever ever Mr Perkins of the firm has al already ready appeared and been examined Mr Steele of the firm arm was ready to appear 78 yesterday at the time appointed but buthis his bla examination wu was postponed not at athis his request but at the requestor request of Judge Lancaster Said II Ho Would Attend afternoon Mr Ir Morgan Morgen re returned turned to the cit city from which he had hadn Jeen n absent d during the of these proceedings of which he knew DO nothing until Thu Thursday at Washington Immediately upon learning leaming of the de desire sire aIe for his hta examination ULdon he Instructed me to advise Mr r Powers counsel that he would attend at any time without subpoena At once I so 80 advised the counsel who answered that this would 1 be e entirely satisfactory and accord we arranged for Mr Morgans voluntarily appearance next Dext week Apparently because of the InabIlIty of the counsel to serve erve a process on hint him for which ml miscarriage he has writ written ten to me expressing regret Mr gan AD was served last evening with a subpoena by a messenger nger who obtained admission to hi his residence upon upen the understanding of Mr Hr Morgan that the messenger had bad m my office a statement Mr Kr Powers coun counsel sel ael disclaims dl claim ay responsibility and expresses regret If any such statement wu was made Says it Was Unjustifiable It may be a matter or of Dews news but It hardly can be a matter of general sat that admission to the private house of any should be o ob f tamed as stated In this t pa paper per by ruse which of course means by deception In any aMY c ease e Such a pro proceeding proceeding would be ORe one for which reputable reputable table counsel naturally would desire to disclaim re responsibility In this case cae any such proceedIng was George Georg Alfred Lamb of for Peter Power made the following statement state statement ment tonight I 1 accept responsIbility for the len service ice made upon Mr Morgan and the manner in which It was made I lied 1 d good reas reason Jn to believe that Mr Mfr Mor Morgan Morgan gan would not willingly accept service and in making service In the man manner et In whIch be did the process server em employed employed by me merely fulfilled hIS duty uw as a process server Upholds the Process Server I had previously endeavored to at range with Francis H B Kellogg general counsel for fer th the Northern Rail Railroad road company that witnesses In the case of against the N Pacific pacU e company shoal should be c tho gout t service ot of subpoena and at times as might be agreed on Although Mr Kellogg In the instance agreed with Judge and myself In Minneapolis that he would endeavor to arrange this Ita he sub subsequently subsequently announced his failure to do doso doso so and notified me that I 1 must mOAt obtain the testimony or of witnesses as beet I could It therefore became my duty to my client to use every moans means of to have service mode made upon witnesses who whose e testimony I desired Until halt half pat past four yesterday afternoon I had re received received no notification n that Mr Morgan would voluntarily testify but I had been led to believe that he not testify unless 8 he was duly subpoenaed I was unable to recall all my sub aub subpoena poena service but I dont agree with the conclusions reached by Mr Stetson There are no ethics about this S service When a lawyer gives a process server SErer servera a paper to serve It becomes the duty ot of the process server to serve the paper to him with the least leut delay and in any manner that Presents It Is 18 perfectly justifiable for a process server to make service to In any manner and by any means and I certainly will not repudiate the act ora ofa man who was employed by bj me and who sought OUght to serve me zealously |