Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "75722495",
    "label": "Memorandum, April 12, 1928",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722495"
}

{
    "id": "75722495",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722495",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Memorandum, April 12, 1928",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722495",
    "collections": [
        "Safety Light Collection",
        "Records Related to Radium Dial Painters"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001252.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001252.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001252.jpg",
    "imageCount": 2,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75722495",
    "naId": 75722495,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 2,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/electronic-records/SLC/Radium/SLC_0001252.pdf",
    "mediaId": "1bdf179c3aa0a546",
    "ocrText": "semorandum or interview with IF. SERIMALTOSKI\nApril 12th,1928 - at #9 Franklin St.Newark,N.J.\nThe writer explained to Dr. S. that we were anxious to ascertain\n(1) whether or not plants engaged in application of luminous materials contain\ning radium or radio-active constituents, used a method similar to that\nwhich we employed at our plant in Orange. That is does the general\npractice abroad consist of using fine camel's hair brushes for painting the\nnumbrols on watch dials, and do the operators point the brush with their\nlips, or did they do so at any time during the history of the industry.\n(2) Whether his survey brought to 11ght any condition abroad similar to that\napparently existing among our former employees.\nDr. S.'s reply to the first question was that he had no knowledge.\nHe further stated that he felt the matter of the law suits which we are defend-\ning at this time was purely a personal matter between us and the plaintiffs, and\nhe could, therefore, 800 no reason why he should enter into the picture in any\nway. He stated that he could not testify without taking sides,so to speak,\nand he feels that his connections with the State Department of Labor are such\nthat he should not under any circumstances enter into this question. Dr. S.\ncontinued by saying that the information supplied him while he was abroad was\nstrictly confidential in nature, and he felt that he would be betraying the\nconfidence of those whom he interviewed should he disclose such information\nas they gave him.\nDr. S. is very determined in his attitude not to become involved in\nthese law suits, and stated that should he be called as an involuntary witness\nhe might prove more detrimental than beneficial to us. This I attribute\nlargely as a means of defense that Dr. S. put out to avoid our subpoonaing him as\na witness. While I called to his attention the fact that Dr. McBride had\nbeen called by the plaintiffs, and that we could see no objection to his appear-\ning in the case - he frankly stated that Dr. MeBride was appearing much against\nhis wishes.\nIn the course of our conversation Dr. S. suggested that we obtain the\ninformation that he has (which frankly admitted that he lmove the method\nemployed in the painting of watch dials abroad) in the same manner as he obtained\nsame, that is, by sending a representative abroad to interview those engaged in\nthis line of industry. he said that he would be glad to furnish us with the\nnames and addresses of the people whom he interviewed, and would go so far as\nto write these people as to who no are, and recommend that they supply us with\nsuch general information as we might desire. I told Dr. S. that we would be\nver glad to get this list and he promised to send it to us.\nMy reaction as a result of the interview with Dr. Sanmaloteki is that\nwe would probably be better off not to cell him as a witness, unless absolutely\nnecessary. Dr. MeBride apparently has a detailed report of Dr. S.'s survey\nof the situation abroad, and it is quite probable that we can obtain the informa-\ntion which we desire through Dr. McBride when he is placed on the witness stand\nby the plaintiffs. The objection to such a procedure is that we are not\nsware of the nature of the information which in going to develop. However, I\ndo not see how it can prove particularly detrimental.\nHHBarker:RH"
}