Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "75720894",
    "label": "Deposition, May 21, 1926",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75720894"
}

{
    "id": "75720894",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75720894",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Deposition, May 21, 1926",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75720894",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000792_Page_1.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000792_Page_1.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000792_Page_1.jpg",
    "imageCount": 8,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75720894",
    "naId": 75720894,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 8,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0000792.pdf",
    "mediaId": "9a97521c348ab891",
    "ocrText": "STATE OF NEW YORK\nCOUNTY OF NEW YORK\nmm\nSS.\nCLARENCE B. LEE, being duly sworn, deposes and says:\nThat he resides at 11 Crestwood Avenue, Nutley, New Jersey. That\nhe is Treasurer of the United States Radium Corporation with principal\noffices at 30 Church Street, New York City. That on May 19th, 1926,\nhe attended a conference in the Directors' Room of the offices of the\nsaid United States Radium Corporation at 30 Church Street, New York City,\nbetween the hours of 10:40 A. M. and 11:35 A. M. That there were present\nat said conference, W. Redmond Cross, Dean S. Edmonds, Joseph W. Burden,\nDirectors of the said Corporation: Arthur Roeder, President and Director\nof said Corporation: Dr. Joseph P. Knef of Newark, New Jersey; and the\ndeponent.\nThat deponent attended a conference with Dr. Joseph P. Knef,\nJosiah Stryker, and James H. M. Tams, on the morning of May 12th, 1926,\nin the offices of Lindabury, Depue and Faulks, located at 763 Broad Street,\nNewark, New Jersey, at which time said Dr. Knef expressed a desire to\nmake a proposition to the Directors of the United States Radium\nCorporation, and that the said conference of May 19th was arranged for\nthe purpose of hearing said proposition from Dr. Knef.\nThat the deponent and all of said parties to the conference\nof May 19th were present at the start of said conference and all parties\nthereto remained during the entire conference, which lasted from 10:40 A.M.\nto 11:35 A.M. That deponent participated in said conference and paid\nstrict attention to what was said and done thereat, and that the following\nis a true and correct report of the substance of what was said and done at\nthe conference.\nDr. Knef opened the conference by stating that he was\ncoming to us looking for justice.\nHe dwelt at some length on the vast\namount of research work which he had done on the so-called \"Radium\nNecrosis\" cases although he did not use this specific term.\nHe told\n- 2 -\nof his treatment of the Maggia girl, of the Carlough girl, and\nMrs. Maillefer. He said that over a period of considerable time he\nhad treated the Carlough girl and called on her in Orange from two to\nsix times daily. He also stated that he had spent as high as three\ndays and nights at a time with her. He also stated that he believes\nthere are a great many more cases coming up which may result in suits\nagainst us. He further stated that through his research work he had\ndiscovered a successful method of treating these cases whereby they could\nbe carried along until they died of natural causes.\nDr. Knef, without making any specific proposition at this\npoint, said he came to find out whether he was going to play ball with\nus or against us. Stated he wanted to work with us if possible but in\nany event he must be compensated for his services. He explained how\nvaluable he could be to us by influencing patients not to institute suits\nagainst us and also how valuable he could be as a witness on our behalf.\nStated he knew more about the subject of \"Radium Necrosis\" than any one\nelse.\nStated that he could testify 80 as to get judgments against us.\nAt this point, he exhibited a number of photographs and\nX-Ray films of some of the girls who have already died. He also exhibited\nX-Ray pictures of cases now under treatment by him. He showed what\npurported to be a portion of the jaw bone of the Carlough girl.\nThese\nvarious pictures he explained in some detail. He also told of the vast\namount of time he had spent in research work and in the actual treatment\nof these cases and kept repeating that he must be compensated for\nhis services.\nHe also displayed a series of pictures of what he termed\na new case which came to him one week ago last Monday. He said that\nin this case he could say it was either \"Radium Necrosis\" or Pyerrhea.\nHe also stated that he knew that this particular patient had tubercular\ntendencies.\nAt this point Mr. Cross asked if he could cure this case,\n- 3 -\nto which Dr. Knef replied that he would not guarantee a cure but he\ncould keep the patient from getting worse until she would probably\ndie of some other cause. Stated that he could do more than any one\nelse in the treatment of such cases.\nHe suggested that he be given a list of the girls who\nhad previously worked. for us 80 that he could locate them and possibly\ninfluence them to take his treatment. Stated that he was developing\na machine or method of treatment which he believed would make it possible\nto extract some of the radium from the bones of living patients.\nHe\nexplained in considerable detail how on this recent case as well as other\ncases he could testify either way, that is, whether the patient was\nsuffering from radium poisoning or pyorrhea.\nStated his opinion could\nbe as he wished it to be at the time of testifying. Stated he could\ntestify intelligently whether the case was either radium poisoning or\npyerrhea and that he could not be successfully contradicted. Also said\nthat expert witnesses always testify in favor of the side that paid them.\nAfter a more or less lengthy discussion by Dr. Knef,\nMr. Cross asked him what his proposition was. Dr. Knef stated that he\nhad proposed to us that we pay him ten thousand dollars for services so\nfar rendered in treating these various cases, and that he thought this\nwas a reasonable amount.\nHe explained the fairness of this charge\nby going into more or less detail regarding the work he had done on\nthe Maggia, Carlough, and Maillefer cases, and referring briefly to work\ndone on other cases. Stated that he is now treating a number of other\ncases and that he must be paid either by us or by some one. He said he\nwanted to know whether he was going to play ball for us or against us.\nStated that if we were not interested in his proposition that he proposed\nto sue a number of his patients for large amounts and that he in turn\nwould have them sue us. He also stated that if these suits were brought\nagainst us there would be no settlements out of court and that there\nwould be no Kalisches in the suits. He also stated that he would\n- 4 -\nguarantee that we would lose these suits as a result of his testimony\nagainst us.\nAt this point Mr. Roeder asked Dr. Knef if he was a\nphysician as well as a dentist. He replied no, not so far as a\nlicense was concerned. He said he did not want to appear to be\n\"blowing his own horn,\" but that he knew more about medicine than\nmost doctors. He said he had studied medicine in college during\nhis dental course and had had a practical experience in hospital\nwork for the past twenty-three years. That he could pass the\nNew York Medical Board examination without doubt.\nHe also proposed that we either draw a formal\nagreement or enter into a \"gentlemen's agreement\" to pay him for the\ntreatment of these present cases. Questioned as to what this would\ncost us, he stated that his usual price for office calls was three\ndollars per call, plus the X-Ray pictures. That he would charge\nus but two dollars per visit, plus the X-Ray picturess and would\ncredit to us any fees which he might collect from his patients. That\nif such an arrangement were entered into he would work for us in every\nway. Explained in some detail the advantages to us in having him\nworking for us and referred to an X-Ray film and told how he could\nsay if called to testify that this was an aggravated case of pyorrhea,\nbut that if he testified against us he could say it was \"Radium\nNecrosis.\" That he could think whatever he wanted to on the stand\nand could not be successfully controverted. Stated he had had court\nexperience as a witness. He said he could believe that the moon was\nmade of green cheese or blue cheese without perjuring himself.\nMr. Cross than said your attitude then is based on ten\nthousand dollars plus other financial considerations 1 Dr. Knef\nreplied yes, that his interest was on the side of the bread that his\nbutter was on. He was asked if we agreed to his proposition, would\nhe be able to have all the girls come to him for treatment. He thought\n- 5 -\nthat he could have a majority of them come to him since he was\nrecognized as an expert on this work and that he could go to the\nvarious dentists in Newark, the Oranges and vicinity, and have them\nrefer cases to him. He was then asked if he would tell the\npatients that he was being paid by us for their treatment.\nHe\nstated that if we played ball with him he would not tell them.\nThat he must be compensated. That if we ass not pay him he\nwould sue some of these girls for large sums. Stated he had had &\ngreat burden wished on him which was much like being made an\nexecutor of an estate.\nMr. Cross then asked Dr. Knef why if these\npeople owed him money it was not the proper thing for him to sue\nthem. Dr. Knef said probably that was the proper procedure and\nthat if suits in turn were brought against us that he would guarantee\nthat they would be won.\nHe was then asked about the fee he received in the suits\nwhich were settled. He said he did not receive nearly enough to\ncompensate him for his services. He then referred to the Maggia\ngirl and said it was problematical as to whether a suit could be\nbrought against us. Speaking of the Maggia girl, who died some three\nyears ago, he stated that a justice of the Supreme Court had told him\nthat he believed this case could be used as a basis of a suit. He\nsaid that he could get permission to exhuma the body and that he knew\nthat he could scientifically prove that Radium caused her death as he\nwould show Radium in the bones.\nMr. Cross then said that we had nothing to do with\nthese original cases and that he did not 800 why we should pay the\nten thousand dollars.\nAsked if the ten thousand dollars was\nessential to Dr. Knef's future services, Dr. Knef replied yes, that\nhe must be compensated for the work already done. That from a\npurely business point of view he was a very valuable man to have with us.\n- 6 -\nMr. Cross then said, the future by itself is not sufficient, you\nmust get the ten thousand dollars. Dr. Knef replied, yes, he\nmust be compensated. He proposed to be reasonable with us in the\nfuture and that he did not intend to gouge or bleed us.\nMr. Edmonds then referring to a series of X-Ray\npictures, asked Dr. Knef if he were a witness and testifying in a\ncase and using these negatives as a basis, if he could say that the\npictures showed either radium necrosis or pyorrhea. Dr. Knef\nreplied that he could if he wanted to.. That if he was working for\nus he would say that it showed pyerrhea. That very few physicians\nwould be competent to testify on the matter and that lawyers knew very\nlittle about it and that he could as an expert take either side and\njusti fy his position.\nHe stated he could say anything he wanted to.\nThen Dr. Knef explained in great detail how a dentist\nmust protect his reputation. He referred to a case where the father\nof a girl whom he had treated proposed to bring suit against him. He\ntold how he was protected by three insurance companies but that he could\nnot permit his professional reputation to be attacked. He told the\nfather of the girl that if he started suit he would put him on the\nstand, put his wife on the stand, ask them embarrassing questions about\nvarious venereal diseases, and in this way he could make it very\nembarrassing for the father and possibly break up his home. He stated\nthat he could either be as ferocious as a lion or as gentle as a lamb\ndepending on the circumstances.\nMr. Cross then said unless we pay you the ten thousand\ndollars you are in a position to make a lot of trouble for us and if we do\npay you the ten thousand dollars you will help us. Dr. Knef replied,\nyes, that he could help us and that his proposition to us was not\nblackmail either. All he wanted was to be compensated for his services\nand that he must be compensated.\nMr. Cross then said that this was\nsomething with which we could have nothing to do. Dr. Knef replied, yes,\n- 7 -\nbut you may have something to do with it.\nAt this point Mr. Roeder said to Dr. Knef\nyour proposition is absolutely inmoral and we will have nothing\nwhatever to do with it.\nDr. Knef replied, immoral, eh ?\nIs\nthat answer final ?\nAt this point Dr. Knef arose, gathered up his\npictures and X-Ray films, and as he was leaving the room said I am\nglad to have met you gentlemen. We will meet again.\nThis affidavit is made the 21st day of May, 1926,\nand is based on the personal recollections of the\ndeponent and on memoranda made by him on the morning\nof May 19th, the morning following the conference.\nSubscribed and\nsworn to before me this\n24ᵗʰ day of May,\n1926.\nam\nROT\nNOTARY PUBLIC, WESTCHESTER COUNTY\nCERTIFICATE FILED IN NEW YORK COUNTY NO. 384\nPULLIC\nNEW YORK REGISTER'S NO. 8803\nCOMM. EXPIRES MARCH 30, 1928"
}