Ask the Scholar
Page 2 of 2
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
COPY
June 20,1925.
Cecil K. Drinker, Esq.,
Dept. of Physiology, School of Public Health,
240 Longwood Ave.,
Cambridge, Mass.
Dear Sir:
Your letter addressed to Mr. Roeder, President of the United
States Radium Corporation, has, in Mr. Roeder's absence, been referred
to me as counsel for the company. I am unable to understand why you
object to the deposit of your report with Mr. McBride, who, as you doubtless
know, is the head of Mr. Roach's Department. I personally had a conference
with Mr. Roach concerning this matter and it was he, and not the Radium
Corporation, who referred it to Mr. McBride.
I am astonished at your statement that you are arranging for the
immediate publication of your report. It is my understanding that you were
retained by and at the expense of the Radium Corporation to make the
investigation in question so that it might have the benefit of your testimony
if it so desired in the course of threatened litigation. While, of course,
the Radium Corporation did not desire this fact to in any way affect your
investigation and conclusions, it certainly assumed that in case your con-
clusions were adverse to its claims you would not publish such conclusions or
otherwise take affirmative action to make them available to the plaintiff in
the litigation.
This is the first occasion in my experience covering many years with
doctors and other expert witnesses of high character when any expert has even threat-
ened, during the pendency of litigation, to publish a report adverse to the party
to such litigation who had retained him.
I presume that you understand that other well informed experts do not
agree with the report which you have made. Notwithstanding this fact the
publication of your report at this time may greatly damage the Radium Corporation
not only in the pending litigation but in its general business which is being
conducted with safety to its employees in accordance with the best information
obtainable on the subject.
I trust that your futther consideration of the duty which you owe to
the Radium Corporation under the circumstances will lead to the decision not to
publish your report.
Yours very truly,
Page data
- Page
- 2
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- a48c2b19242c2a8c
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 75719513
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "75719513",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Dr. Cecil K. Drinker, June 20, 1925",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"imageCount": 2,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "75719513",
"label": "Letters Sent to Dr. Cecil K. Drinker, June 20, 1925",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "75719513",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letters Sent to Dr. Cecil K. Drinker, June 20, 1925",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513",
"collections": [
"Safety Light Collection",
"Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.jpg",
"imageCount": 2,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75719513",
"naId": 75719513,
"levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 2,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000386.pdf",
"mediaId": "a48c2b19242c2a8c",
"ocrText": "COPY\nJune 20,1925.\nCecil K. Drinker, Esq.,\nDept. of Physiology, School of Public Health,\n240 Longwood Ave.,\nCambridge, Mass.\nDear Sir:\nYour letter addressed to Mr. Roeder, President of the United\nStates Radium Corporation, has, in Mr. Roeder's absence, been referred\nto me as counsel for the company. I am unable to understand why you\nobject to the deposit of your report with Mr. McBride, who, as you doubtless\nknow, is the head of Mr. Roach's Department. I personally had a conference\nwith Mr. Roach concerning this matter and it was he, and not the Radium\nCorporation, who referred it to Mr. McBride.\nI am astonished at your statement that you are arranging for the\nimmediate publication of your report. It is my understanding that you were\nretained by and at the expense of the Radium Corporation to make the\ninvestigation in question so that it might have the benefit of your testimony\nif it so desired in the course of threatened litigation. While, of course,\nthe Radium Corporation did not desire this fact to in any way affect your\ninvestigation and conclusions, it certainly assumed that in case your con-\nclusions were adverse to its claims you would not publish such conclusions or\notherwise take affirmative action to make them available to the plaintiff in\nthe litigation.\nThis is the first occasion in my experience covering many years with\ndoctors and other expert witnesses of high character when any expert has even threat-\nened, during the pendency of litigation, to publish a report adverse to the party\nto such litigation who had retained him.\nI presume that you understand that other well informed experts do not\nagree with the report which you have made. Notwithstanding this fact the\npublication of your report at this time may greatly damage the Radium Corporation\nnot only in the pending litigation but in its general business which is being\nconducted with safety to its employees in accordance with the best information\nobtainable on the subject.\nI trust that your futther consideration of the duty which you owe to\nthe Radium Corporation under the circumstances will lead to the decision not to\npublish your report.\nYours very truly,"
}