Oral History Interview with S. Maynard Turk

T: You were born in Roanoke County?

M: Born in Roanoke County.

T: On October 14, 1925?

M: Yes.

T: Judge Turk said that he was born at home - were you born at home or were you born in a

hospital?

M: Yes, I was born at home also.

T: And this was a farm that you all were living on?

M: Yes, a small farm and we grew up ,I might add, poorer than the conventional church

mouse.

T: What did your father do for a living?

M: He was a farmer.

T: And what type of farm did he have?

M: It was a general type farm. We raised some wheat and had an extensive vegetable garden.

Matter of fact, we took some vegetables to the farmer’s market in Roanoke. They had a very

extensive farmer’s market in Roanoke in those days. During the growing season we would take

vegetables to the farmer’s market. That was one of the primary sources of income. But, we did

have cows so we had our own milk as a result of the cows being a part of our operation. We

raised hogs so that we had our meat during the winter. We’d kill the hogs and cure the meat. But,

it was a fairly meager existence.

T: You dad was named James A. Turk. Is that right?

1

M: That’s right.

T: What was your mother’s name?

M: Geneva Alice. Richardson was her maiden name. She had taught school way back in the

teens or in the 1920s before there was any strict requirement for degrees or anything.

T: Was it one of these proverbial one room school houses she taught in?

M: I think so.

T: What is the history of the Turk family?

M: Well, the Turk family landed in Charleston in, I think, the year was 1747. And one

branch went to Georgia and one branch went to Texas. We haven’t done anything to trace that

part of the family—the Turk family on our father’s side. But we have reestablished contacts with

the Georgia side. We have cousins down there who we see.

T: Did the Turk family come over from England?

M: They came from Ireland.

T: How about your mother’s side of the family?

M: We haven’t really done genealogy there because she was—her family was in Virginia

forever and they came over from England also.

T: You were the youngest of three children, right?

M: Right.

T: And besides your brother you have an older sister named Margaret?

M: Right.

T: And then it was the judge and then it was you?

M: Right.

2

T: And what did Margaret end up doing with her life?

M: Well, she was the smartest, I always said, of the three children. She graduated from high

school in ’37, I think, or maybe ’36. She ended up doing basically secretarial work. She didn’t go

to college. I’m not sure that the judge and I would have gone to college but for the GI Bill. That

was in my judgment—and I’m not a big government fan—a well-run program. It continued the

country’s prosperity after World War II. Got it back on its feet. Educated a whole wide of

people who took over society.

T: Where did you go to high school?

M: William Byrd.

T: And what year did you graduate?

M: ‘42.

T: By the time you graduated, of course, the country was at war. After you graduated high

school, did you go immediately into the service?

M: I didn’t go into the service until ’43.

T: So what did you do between high school graduation and going into the service?

M: I worked for the railroad.

T: And Judge Turk said that he also worked for the railroad before entering the service.

M: Right.

T: Is this Norfolk and Western?

M: Yes.

T: What did you do for the railroad?

M: I think it was classified as some kind of a clerk.

T: Your father died when you were fairly young. He died when you were 12 or 13.

3

M: Yes.

T: How did you all—once your father passed—how did you all sort of make ends meet?

M: We continued to work on the farm. My sister, who as I say had graduated, I think, from

high school in ’36, she went to work for—as a secretary for the school principal at William Byrd.

As I said earlier she was the smartest of the three.

T: What was Roanoke like during the depression? Had the depression hit the city

particularly hard?

M: Well, those who were fortunate enough to work for the railroad survived fairly well. But,

I can remember soup lines in Roanoke very vividly.

T: Where did you do your basic training?

M: I did my basic training at Fort Eustis [Virginia].

T: And after Fort Eustis where did Uncle Sam send you?

M: Down to Savannah, Georgia.

T: And what were you trained to be? What did you do in the army?

M: We were in artillery. And that’s the reason my hearing is so poorly—so poor.

T: You had too many mortars going off near you—or shells?

M: Yeah, in my—I have a severe loss of hearing. For example, I can’t possibly drive on the

interstate because I simply can’t hear cars approaching from the rear.

T: Did you lose your hearing right away or did it just sort of develop over time after the

war?

M: Well it developed over time. I went back on active duty during Korea, and I’ve often said

it was the stupidest thing in the world. And why the army did it I don’t know. But, they did what

they call a profile when I went back on active duty which was early 1952. And I was recalled

4

supposedly for 17 months. I ended up getting out at the end of ’52. But they did another profile

when I left active duty at the end of ’52 and there had been a marked difference in my hearing

over that period of time. What happened was—and I’ve never told them this—but we had partied

all night. There was a bunch of young lieutenants who were from the Delaware area and they

knew a bunch of girls. We would party all night and sleep all day. And what we did was the only

place that we had any shade—we would sleep under the guns. And you can imagine what that

did to my hearing.

T: Now when they sent you to Savannah, what were you doing down in Savannah? Were

you doing additional training in artillery?

M: Right.

T: How long were you down in Savannah?

M: I think we left Savannah in September or October.

T: Of ’43?

M: Yes.

T: After Savannah, did you get sent overseas?

M: Yes.

T: How did you get from Savannah to Europe? Did they put you in one of those big troop

ships?

M: I went over on the Queen Mary.

T: Which is a pretty good sized ship.

M: Yes, it’s a pretty good sized ship. There were—it wasn’t the biggest crossing, but there

were 23,000 troops.

T: On the Queen Mary?

5

M: On the Queen Mary.

T: Was she part of a convoy because of the presence of U-boats? Or did she just dash across

the Atlantic by herself because she was do fast?

M: She dashed across the Atlantic by herself.

T: During that run across the Atlantic, did you have any U-boat sightings or was it pretty

uneventful?

M: This is a strange story, and I’ve always remembered it. They used to have what they

called deck side. Everyone was required to leave their quarters and come up on the deck.

T: For fresh air?

M: For fresh air—to get some of the stench out. Somebody yelled “U-boat” and everybody

went to that side of the ship. And it damn near capsized. You can imagine 23,000 troops on one

side of the ship.

T: So she was listing?

M: She sure in hell was. The captain gave it whatever it needed to correct it and that was the

last day we had deck exercises.

T: Did you dock in England?

M: We landed in Scotland. We then took a train down to England. We did some additional

training in England. Then the Battle of the Bulge came along. We were throwing everything we

had to try to stem the German onslaught at that point in time. So we got immediate shipment

over to Europe. Well, now the Battle of the Bulge really was over by the time we got there.

T: What army were you in at that point? Were you the 8th?

M: No, we were in the 1st because the odd numbered armies were in Europe and the even

numbered armies were in the Pacific.

6

T: And did you see any combat?

M: Well, we saw some combat in the sense that we were required to try to shoot down

airplanes, German aircraft. Usually it would be, well I remember one. I was in the

communications part of the outfit and I got detailed out to a signal corps unit right after we had

gone across the Rhine.

T: Is that where Patton pissed into the Rhine?

M: He might have. That’s the reason they often argued about. We have a two lane bridge

here and they argued about whether it needs to be replaced or not. And I always tell ‘em that it

doesn’t need to be replaced. They just need to remove the stoppers at either end. And there is

unlimited amount that you can get across a two lane bridge if you don’t stop. And I remember

very vividly they’re pushing trucks and tanks and stuff in the Rhine because if it was not gonna

slow down…

T: So it a truck broke down they’d just push it over the side?

M: Right.

T: And keep going?

M: Right.

T: As you were moving into Germany, could you see the ravages of war—you could see the

damage to the towns and the people?

M: Oh, yeah.

T: What sticks out in your memory about that?

M: Well, I remember we went into Germany to a town called Aachen. It was pretty

devastated. Some areas of Germany were very devastated. All of what became East Germany

was just rubble.

7

T: As you were pushing through Germany did you see many of the civilians? How did the

civilians act toward the American soldiers?

M: They were not hostile at all. Now you were forbidden to fraternize, but GIs paid no

attention to that. If there was a young lady involved, then you moved right in for the kill – so to

speak.

T: With your chocolate bars and Lucky Strike cigarettes. When the war ended, did you

remain in Germany for a period of time or did you immediately come back home?

M: No. The war ended in Europe in April or May of ’45. I didn’t come back until almost a

year later. Our unit was scheduled to ship out and go to the Pacific, but once they dropped the

atomic bombs and Japan surrendered we stayed over there a few more months. I came back in

May of ’46.

T: So you came back in the May of ’46 and you enrolled in Roanoke College that fall?

M: Yes.

T: Why did you decide to go to college? Was it the GI Bill?

M: Yes.

T: And why Roanoke College?

M: Well, I thought about William and Mary because I had not actually matriculated, but I

had gone down to Williamsburg before I went into the service. They had a program that you

could work for the—I think it was the Navy—someplace around Williamsburg. It was enough to

pay the tuition and room and board. But I never enrolled in there. I don’t know why I didn’t. But

I was very close to enrolling.

8

T: You and the judge ended up both going to Roanoke College. Was the fact that he was

going to Roanoke College a factor in your decision? Were you all close back then?

M: Yes. We are—we were—and still are very close.

T: You both ended up in economics at Roanoke College.

M: Right.

T: Why did you choose economics as a major?

M: Well, it was a good major for pre-law. We were thinking about going to law school. We

weren’t sure that we were going to, but both of us were thinking about it. In those days they

didn’t have what is called LSATs.

T: Did you take any law related courses when you were at Roanoke College?

M: No. I don’t recall that we did.

T: Why were you thinking about attending law school?

M: Dean Myers [Edward “De” Myers], the Dean at Roanoke College at the time, was going

to Washington and Lee to become head of the History department. We were both fairly good

students at Roanoke, and Dean Meyers had been in Pi Kappa Phi – the same fraternity that we

were in. Dean Myers said, “why don’t you come on down to W&L. I think I can get you on a

scholarship program.” We submitted an application and indeed we did get a scholarship. Even

though we had the GI Bill the scholarship was in addition to that. Washington & Lee wrote us a

check for the amount of the scholarship which, as I recall, paid full tuition.

T: So that meant that you didn’t have to work when you were going to law school—which

makes a difference.

M: It sure does.

9

T: When you were at Roanoke College, were there any professors who stand out as

individuals who made an impact on your studies or your life as a student?

M: Well, there was a chemistry professor who I thought was outstanding. He was Professor

[Andrew “Buck”] Murphy. I’m sure he’d be long since dead. I also remember Professor [Frank

E.] Snow, who was a language professor. There was a biology professor also, Dr. [George E.]

Perry. He was outstanding. One of the better professors I’ve ever had. And I’ve had many good

ones through the years.

T: Did you live on campus all four years?

M: No. We only lived on—I don’t remember whether we lived in the fraternity house one or

two years.

T: And that was the Pi Kapp house that was on High Street?

M: Yes.

T: I know you and the judge speak fondly of your involvement in the fraternity. What was it

like being in a fraternity in the 1940s and 1950s?

M: Well, it provided a lot of camaraderie and even though we were in a small school it gave

you sort of an anchor point.

T: Back then living in the fraternity house, did you have a house mother?

M: Yes, and they were very strict.

T: What rules did the fraternity have? No women upstairs?

M: Certainly no women upstairs. No question about that.

T: Did you eat your meals at the fraternity house as well? Did they have a cook?

M: Yes, we did.

10

T: How about formal functions? Did the fraternities have mixers or dances?

M: As I recall we did have a couple of functions when we were at Roanoke. I know we had

them at the fraternity at Washington and Lee, but I think we also had them at Roanoke College.

T: Your wife went to Sweet Briar, right?

M: Yes.

T: When did you meet?

M: After she got out of Sweet Briar, she did a secretarial course; in the early 50s, well even

through the mid-60s, all women could do, or were expected to do, was either teach or do

secretarial work and she didn’t want to teach. So she decided to take a secretarial course in

Washington, DC. She was living there with a girl from Roanoke among others. There were four

or five of them living there in a house in Georgetown. I went up on a blind date and it went from

there.

T: Were you in college at that point or law school?

M: No. I was working for Hercules at that point.

T: OK, so it was after law school.

M: Yes.

T: Who lined you up on the blind date?

M: A guy named Buddy Brewer. He’s now dead. I was thinking about Buddy the other day.

He was in our wedding. He died about three, four years ago.

T: What was the transition like from an undergraduate college to law school? Was the first

semester difficult at W&L or were you prepared for law school?

M: We were pretty well prepared. We both had a good record at Washington & Lee. My

brother’s record was better than mine because he’s smarter than I am. Either that or he worked

11

harder. I don’t think he worked harder. It seemed to come easy to him. Anyway, I remember still

the first course we had—the first case we had—it was Pearson v. Post [a seminal case often

taught in a Property class]. I remember the case very well. Once we had got through the first

semester—now you were somewhat concerned, I think and rightly so, about law school because

you didn’t have any interim exams to guide you as to how you were doing.So it was an all or

nothing proposition.

T: Back then did you take exams after your first year or after your first semester?

M: We took exams after our first semester.

T: That’s a lot of pressure when you have 100% of your grade riding on one test.

M: That’s right.

T: And how did first semesters exams go for you?

M: As I recall pretty well.

T: How would you characterize your classes and your teachers? Did they use the Socratic

method? Were the professors intimidating in class?

M: There were discussions. But I must say I thought the law professors at Washington &

Lee were outstanding.

T: Anyone in particular stand out in your education?

M: Certainly, the most memorable was the Dean and he was referred to as “Skinny”

Williams. He was skinny and country as the day is long but very, very bright.

T: What did he teach?

M: He started out—he was teaching that first course.

T: The property class.

12

M: Yeah, personal property. He also taught trust and I think wills. Probably taught some

other courses, but those are courses that I remember.

T: Did you interact socially with your professors? Did you go to dinner at their homes or

have drinks with them? What was the relationship between professor and students there?

M: Well, there was one professor, Professor Charlie McDowell, whose son, Charlie Jr., later

became a reporter for the Richmond Times Dispatch.. His wife was secretary to the Dean. Charlie

used to hang out with the students, but I don’t think it affected his ability to teach and to be

impartial. Hard to imagine that it didn’t, but I don’t think it did.

T: How about at Roanoke College? Were there professors that you socialized with or

professors that took students under their wing?

M: I can’t say that there were or I don’t recall any specifically. I had some good professors.

For example, Professor Brown, Charlie Brown, who had gotten his, I think his Ph.D. at Brown.

He had some funny methods of teaching. He would, for example, he would say that a C+ and a

C+ would equal to a B-. And that made some sense, but then he would say that a B- and a B-

only equaled to a C+.

T: That must be irritating if you’re a student.

M: Yes.

T: At W&L, were you classmates with the Chief Justice’s son?

M: Yes - what was the Chief Justice’s name?

T: The Chief Justice would have been Fred Vinson. I think this would have been Fred

Vinson, Jr.

M: Junior. He was there. He was a senior as I recall. He was a senior during our freshman

year.

13

T: Did the Chief Judge ever come down to W&L?

M: I don’t remember that he did.

T: When you were at Roanoke College were you involved—besides a fraternity—in any

other clubs or activities or sports?

M: I ran on the track team.

T: OK, who was the track coach back then?

M: Homer Bast.

T: And what event or events did you run in on the track team?

M: I was always long distance. I also ran cross country.

T: Were you any good?

M: Well, I got a letter.

T: So you made it to the finish line.

M: Yeah. And Homer Bast was an outstanding coach and an outstanding person.

T: When you were at law school, were you on the law review?

M: Yes.

T: Did you do anything else like Moot Court? Did they have Moot Court back then?

M: I don’t believe they did.

T: Before we started recording, you mentioned to me that you had a “sense” that you were

going to be called up for the Korean War and so you decided to take the bar exam early.

M: Yes.

T: At that time, did most law students take the bar during their second year?

M: Yes.

14

T: You graduate in the spring of 1951. How long after that did you got called up to active

duty again?

M: I went right on active duty. I had been able to get deferred a couple of times. I

immediately went on active duty.

T: When you went on active duty did you already have a law job lined up?

M: No, I reported in at Fort Meade. I guess that’s the army’s method of doing things. They

passed around a profile on all new arrivals at the post. I got a call from the General , who wanted

to see me. I went and reported as I was duly summoned to do. He laid out all the virtues of going

in nto the JAG Corps. I said “well, it sounds pretty good. What’s involved?” He said, I

remember this conversation like it was yesterday, he said, “well you would have to sign on for an

additional 13 months. I was on a recall for 17 months. And I said, “this conversation is over. I

said I don’t intend to stay one day longer than I am forced to. I already served two and a half

years or a little more than that during World War II and this is not a voluntary recall. And I don’t

intend to stay one day longer than is required.” So that ended that. Now I did do a lot of court-

martial work during World War II—during the Korean War.

T: So you didn’t have to go to JAG to do that?

M: No.

T: And were you on the prosecution side or the defense side?

M: No, usually on the defense side because the army had—and I think they still have—the

rule that the defense counsel must have equal or better qualifications than the prosecution.

Usually the prosecution would just be a line officer. Since I had graduated from law school and

was a member of the bar, that was superior so far as the army was concerned for qualification.

So, I got a lot of appointments.

15

T: What type of cases were you defending?

M: Mostly AWOL cases. It was about the time the troops were being integrated. President

Truman, I think, ordered the integration in 1952. I was in a Mississippi National Guard unit.

There was an agreement that they wouldn’t integrate that unit as long as the guard was on active

duty from Mississippi because there were pretty strong feelings in those days.

T: I can imagine.

M: They have—thank goodness they have—since subsided, but in those days they were

pretty strong. So there was an all black unit that had not been integrated and it was going be

integrated into the unit I was in. I think the best thing that ever happened to the armed forces was

the integration.

T: Were you stateside during the entire Korean War?

M: I was stateside the entire time.

T: Did you stay in the reserves after the Korean War?

M: I stayed in the reserves. By that time I had spent ten or eleven years in service, and I was

thinking about the great pension I would get. It turned out to be the smartest decision I ever

made - not because of the handsome pension I’d get, but because of Tricare for life which is a

medical program. It picks up where Medicare leaves off. It’s a supplement to Medicare. You pay

nothing for it.

T: So what month and year did you come back from your second tour of duty with Uncle

Sam? Your first law job was with Dodson, Pence & Coulter, is that right?

M: Yes.

T: So did you come back from your service in the Korean War and did you immediately

start looking for legal employment at that point?

16

M: I was content to take two or three months off because I had gone right into service after I

finished my exams at the end of the semester in ’51. I had terminal leave, which paid me about

three or four months pay, and I figured what the hell—live it up a little.

T: Did you travel—or what did you do? Just go home and sleep in everyday?

M: I don’t think I travelled any, but I got this call from Dodson Pence. I think it was Jack

Coulter that called me. Jack had gone to Washington & Lee. [Richard Franklin] Dick Pence [Sr.]

had gone to Harvard and[E. Griffith] Griff Dodson [Jr.]had gone to UVA. All three of those

people are now dead now. Jack Coulter died much too young.

T: Was this law firm located in Roanoke?

M: In Roanoke.

T: What type of firm were they?

M: A little bit of everything. We did some criminal work. I was sort of, and partly because of

my experience in the service, they figured that I could cut my teeth on criminal work. I did a few

small criminal cases.

T: How long were you with the firm?

M: I was with the firm about a year and a half.

T: At some point you went in house with Radford Army Arsenal?

M: Yes.

T: When you started there how big of a facility was it?

M: I think we had about three or four thousand employees at that time.

T: Did it always stay about that size or did it grow during the Viet Nam war?

M: I joined them in ’54. That was about the end of the Korean War because Eisenhower had

run and been elected in ’52. You’re too young to remember, but he said if I’m elected I will go to

17

Korea. And he was elected and he went to Korea. You can imagine the security that was required

to protect him.

T: How did you get the job with Radford?

M: They decided they wanted a local attorney. I interviewed and went to work for it.

T: Was Radford Army Arsenal owned by Hercules at that time?

M: No. It’s never been owned by Hercules.

T: What was the relationship between the Arsenal and Hercules?

M: It was called a GOCO plant—government owned—contractor operated.

T: And Hercules was the contractor.

M: Right.

T: Were they always the contractor who operated the plant?

M: Right. They built it. It was just farmland before the Arsenal went in there. During the

height of World War II my recollection is that they had 23,000 people working there.

T: That’s a city.

M: It really is.

T: As general counsel, what did you do? What types of legal issues were you involved in?

M: As much as anything we were involved in relationship the government. The idea was

that we didn’t get a very big fee for operating the plant, but we wanted to get all our costs back.

So we wanted to be sure that we operated in such a manner that we got all our costs back and we

could worry about the fee later. But, for example, I remember working for months on one

project. When I went there we didn’t have a pension plan for the Radford Arsenal employees.

So it was my job to convince the government that they should fund the pension plan because

these were Hercules employees that were entitled to the benefits including the pension plan that

18

Hercules offered in its commercial operation. We finally convinced the government that that was

only fair. They approved the adoption of the pension plan, I think, early on while I was there. I

started in the summer of ’54. I think we had the approval for the pension plan probably by the

end of ’55 or early ’56.

T: Being in house counsel, were you the point person for any legal issues that came up? If

there was a slip and fall in the plant or you wanted to buy more land or were the person to deal

with those issues?

M: Right.

T: During the time you were at the Arsenal as in house counsel, were there any other major

legal issues you tackled besides the pension plan?

M: We had the usual stuff with the local community. For example, the government had a

program of reimbursing the local community for the cost of the extra people that were put in the

school system. I had—I can’t remember now what the specific issues were—but I had some

issues with that.

T: Now, you remained there until…

M: ’59.

T: …and you transferred to the home office?

M: Well, I transferred first to Utah. We were doing a major program with the government

involving what was referred to at the time as the Minute Man Missile. I went out there to train a

new lawyer we had hired for the operation at—right outside Salt Lake City.

T: What was Hercules role? Were they building the missiles or building the warheads or the

silos?

M: We were making the propellant for the missiles.

19

T: When you started with Hercules, how big of a corporation was it?

M: You know, after World War II Hercules was the second largest—I think this is right—

was the chemical company in the country. DuPont was the biggest. Hercules was bigger than

Dow Chemical at the end of the war.

T: When was Hercules founded?

M: It was a spin off from the DuPont Company in 1912.

T: Was it always headquartered here in Delaware?

M: Yes.

T: Was Hercules always a chemical company? Did it diversify in later years?

M: They were always a chemical company. They started out when they were spun off as just

a powder company. After World War I, they began to diversify.

T: Were these chemical products for the military or they also had commercial applications?

M: The chemical company—the chemical products had commercial operations.

T: So you were in Utah for a couple of months and then you came to Wilmington to be part

of the general counsel office.

M: Right.

T: How many lawyers did they have in the general counsel office in 1959?

M: As I recall seven or eight.

T: Were you the head of the office or did you start off as one of the?

M: No, I didn’t become general counsel until ’75 or ’76.

T: By the time you became general counsel how many lawyers did you have working for

you in house?

M: Probably ten or twelve.

20

T: When you worked in the general counsel’s office in Delaware, did you have the same

types of duties that you had at the Arsenal?

M: Well, in the legal department we did labor work. We did administrative law work. We

didn’t do any litigation.

T: So you farmed that out to other firms?

M: We farmed out that out to various firms around the country depending on where it was.

T: So became general counsel in 1975…

M: ’75 or ’76.

T: And a couple years later, you also went on the Board of Directors, is that right?

M: Right.

T: How long did you stay with Hercules?

M: Yes, 1990 when I turned 65.

T: Even though you were on the Board of Directors, did you still remain the head of the

legal department?

M: Yes, I did.

T: During the time you were there at Hercules did the types of legal issues that the company

was facing—did they change?

M: Major changes. Before I became general counsel—at that time the patent department was

a separate department and I was transferred over to run the patent department. I might say to the

chagrin of a lot of people.

T: Why to the chagrin of some people—because you weren’t a patent lawyer by training?

M: Yes. I did take the patent exam and was qualified before the patent office. Never wrote a

patent application. Never intend to. But anyway I’m qualified theoretically to practice patent law.

21

Patent litigation is extremely expensive because it covers such a long period of time and you

have depositions running out the ying-yang in patent litigation. I don’t know if you’ve ever been

involved in a patent litigation.

T: No.

M: It’s interminable.

T: Why?

M: Patents are issued by the Patent Office. But that’s just the beginning because almost

nobody is satisfied that the patent is legal or legitimate

T: Tell me a little more about the legal standard. So if I come up with an invention and I

want to patent it, I have to show that it’s not an obvious invention?

M: You have to show that, so far as you’re concerned, it’s new and novel and the patent

examiner will say well I think this is obvious. And you’ve got to overcome that within the Patent

Office. But, once the patent is issued that’s only half of the battle—maybe not even half.

T: So what comes next? What’s the other half of the battle?

M: The other half of the battle is when somebody starts practicing the patent other than the

patent owner. Then the patent owner goes to whoever is practicing his invention and say, “Look.

I own this patent and you’re practicing it. I want damages in the way of royalties or I’m not

willing to license it at all.” There’s no requirement that you license it at all.

T: So in the case of Hercules what sort of patents would be involved —some sort of new

chemical compound that their scientist researched and discovered and created and patented and

then someone else is going to go out and make the same product?

22

M: Yes. As a matter of fact we had a product called Kymene. That’s a trademark name. But

it was—in addition to having a trademark name, it was a patented product. We had a long drawn

out litigation over the chemical that made up the compound.

T: What was the compound Kymene used for?

M: It was a wet strength paper product. It gives strength to paper towels, to toilet paper, and

to napkins without taking away the softness. We had major litigation which for the time was

extremely expensive. I think we spent a million and a half dollars over protecting Kymene. This

was probably in the late 60s or early 70s.

T: Earlier I asked you how the legal issues changed when you were at Hercules. What else

changed during the time you were there?

M: Well, a lot of stuff came into being.

T: Like OSHA?

M: OSHA, environmental. I can’t think of others, but there were four or five statutes that had

been put on the books that weren’t on the books when I came to Hercules in 1954.

T: In the 70s, how many facilities did Hercules have around the country?

M: Probably 15 or 20.

T: And were they located throughout the country or were they concentrated in a certain area

of the country?

M: Well, they were concentrated to some extent in the same area, but they were located to

some extent throughout the country. We had a couple of facilities in California and I don’t

remember whether we had one in Washington or Oregon or not. But we had one in Salt Lake

City then. That facility early on was just a dynamite facility. It was used primarily in the copper

mines to blast away some of the rock and so forth. There’s a huge, huge pit out there which was

23

a Kennecott copper pit. It was done by Hercules dynamite. Now, then when we got into the

aerospace business in a big way, which we did about ’59, that became a major facility for the

aerospace.

T: For testing or for production?

M: For production and testing.

T: So were you all involved in making propellant for rockets?

M: We were making propellants. We were actually making the whole Minute Man Missile or

one stage of it. As I recall the original Minute Man was a three stage rocket. I think we made the

propellant for two of the three stages.

T: It seems like you did a fair amount of business with the government—or for the

government—with gun powder and propellants for the missiles. Were there security issues

involved that you, as in house counsel, were involved in overseeing?

M: Yes, because a lot of these programs were classified and anybody having involvement

with the programs had to be cleared for security purposes. Now, there were a lot of jobs that

didn’t require security clearance. But, you see this at the height of the cold war. We felt pretty

strong about that.

T: So if I was a new scientist that was hired for a Hercules facility to work on one of these

projects, would your office be in charge of coordinating security clearances and working with the

government?

M: We had a security group. We normally had a former FBI agent which headed up the

security group. He or she, as the case might be, would run clearance on anybody that needed it—

a new clearance. I would work very closely with the security officer to be sure that they knew if

there was security issues involved.

24

T: Did you have to tour all these facilities on a routine basis? Was that part of your job

duties as or did you just primarily stay in the home office?

M: I did a lot of traveling during my career. A lot of it before I became general counsel. And

a lot of after. A lot of it was overseas. I must have made eight or ten trips to Tokyo. Because we

had a pretty big operation at that time in Japan. And we would normally license or sign an

agreement with a local partner or local company. We would transfer the technology over and a

new joint venture was generally formed. We’d do the work and we were in charge of securing

Japanese counsel that would form the joint venture and do the work necessary.

T: What sort of joint venture was in Tokyo?

M: The Kymene was a product that we formed a joint venture for.

T: Were there other Hercules facilities overseas that you traveled to besides Tokyo?

M: Oh yes. I spent half my life—that’s an exaggeration—I spent many months in Pakistan.

We had a fertilizer venture with a local firm—partnered with a local firm. A family named

Dawood which is one of the leading families in Pakistan. My job was to try to get money out.

They were big on rupees. We didn’t want rupees. You can’t spend rupees.

T: In Wilmington.

M: In Wilmington or New York. They wanted the green backs. I had meetings with Zia

[Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq] while he was president. He was president as the result of a military

coup. I had one meeting or maybe two with Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. She was an

interesting woman.

T: How so?

M: You could never have a private audience with her because her husband had to be there.

That’s the Muslim tradition. She was extremely well educated. I think she’d been educated at

25

one of the Ivy League schools. I think it might have been Harvard She was a very polite lady

and she later was assassinated.

T: She came to Roanoke College about 15 years ago and spoke.

M: Oh, she did?

T: What was it like traveling to Pakistan in the 60s and 70s? What was the country like?

M: Pretty backward, but we were treated like royalty. My wife went over with me on a

couple of trips because they were in addition to being business trips, they were also social events.

We went to two or three family weddings. We got to know the family pretty well.

T: Families of the individuals who were involved in the operations over there?

M: Right, who were the joint venture partners. We got to know the family pretty well. They

would always invite us to a wedding. I remember one time we stopped in Egypt and one time we

stopped in Italy because we had a lot of dealings in Italy. We had a joint venture there with

Montedison [S.p.A.] which was a big chemical company who had that name because it had been

bought out by Edison. They spun the Edison part off but kept the name. We had a big venture

there and so we stopped there on one trip back. Our last trip was in ’90 sometime before I retired.

We stopped off in Berlin.

T: Was that the first time you’d been back to Berlin since the war or had you been back in

Germany since then?

M: I had been back in Germany several times since the war. I had only been back to Berlin

one time before this. We were in Frankfurt negotiating with Hurst, the big chemical company.

We went up to—they were headquartered in Frankfurt. But we went up to Berlin—and this was a

long time before the wall came down—in ’82 or ’83. You flew into West Berlin. But you were

26

permitted to cross the border into East Berlin. It was still pretty well ravaged because they hadn’t

done much to restore it—not like West Berlin which was booming.

T: Did you get to travel much in East Germany?

M: Only—we toured East Berlin for two days while we were on that trip. I remember one

incident. We had been in East Berlin all day on Saturday. We finally ended under the

Lindenstrasse.

T: The Lindenstrasse. What’s that?

M: It’s one exit to Berlin. We tried to get out—even though we had come in through

Checkpoint Charlie we tried to check out at this point. The guy took our passports. There was

one other guy with me. They took our passports and took them behind the curtain. Finally they

came back out and said you came in through Checkpoint Charlie. We said yea. Well you have to

go back the same way—same gate you came in through. We said there’s no chance we can get

out here? And they said none. So we went up—it was at a railroad station—we went back

upstairs and we found out it was next to impossible to get a cab because there were a line a half

mile long. There was one cab coming about every twenty minutes. So by that time we were dead

tired but we hoofed it back to Checkpoint Charley.

T: How long of a walk was that?

M: Probably two to three miles at least.

T: So were the Soviets just messing with you because you were an American?

M: I think so. They had some very strict rules. You couldn’t bring—and I’ve never

understood this one because you would have thought that they would be happy to have your

dollars in lieu of the East Berlin money—whatever it was. You could only take a very, very

limited amount of money out of East Berlin—I don’t remember what the designation was—you

27

know, it wasn’t dollars certainly—I don’t think it was marks, but it might have been. If it were it

would have been an East German mark not the western mark. They would only let you bring a

very limited amount of those out of Berlin—out of East Berlin. And, they searched you. It was

fair to say that those East Berliners lived pretty austerely.

T: How about when you were traveling to Pakistan, as a westerner did you ever feel any

hostility—did you feel welcome?

M: You would—we usually flew in—I think we always flew into Karachi. Your host could

only come in a certain distance. There was masses and masses of people outside. Until you found

your host and got secure with the host you felt pretty intimidated with all this mass of humanity

out there. All of which were males—male and unemployed I’m assuming.

T: At the same time that you were doing all this in the 60s and 70s you were also getting

involved with some educational issues. When did you go on the Board of Visitors at Radford?

Was that in ’72?

M: I had served a couple of years before that. I was appointed by Linwood Holton and I’m

not sure when he was governor.

T: How many years total did you serve? Were you on the board for eight or twelve years?

M: I think I served eight years on the Radford Board and then I also did one tour on the

George Mason Board.

T: Did you enjoy being on the Radford Board and the George Mason Board? Was that

something that interested you—higher education?

M: Yes, it was interesting to see how these state institutions were run. We had management

issues at Radford because we were—there was a guy there that had been president forever. I’ve

forgotten his name. But, we were not making much progress as an institution. There was some

28

effort to make us part of VPI. We didn’t want any part of that. So one major issue was to keep us

independent and avoid being taken over by VPI which we were able to successfully to do. But it

was a struggle.

T: During the time you were on the Radford Board were there other initiatives or changes

that the Board pushed through that helped Radford move forward?

M: I don’t recall what we did to avoid the takeover by VPI. But, I remember going down and

testifying before the General Assembly that we were perfectly capable of rowing our own boat

and didn’t need to be a part of a bigger institution and the General Assembly bought that. I’m not

quite sure why they did.

T: You must have been very persuasive.

M: We did—I remember they had the hearing and they had summoned us down. Come to

think of it—it may have had something to do with the fact that I had been responsible for getting

Al Giacco on the Board at VPI. He was a VPI graduate. I think he was appointed by Holton also.

I know we served about the same time because sometimes we would take the company plane

down together. He may have been influential in saying that Tech had enough to do and didn’t

need Radford under its wing. I don’t remember. But it would it would be logical that he felt that

way since I had tried to convince him—I think I’d been pretty successful—that they didn’t want

the complications of taking on Radford.

T: How about your work on the George Mason Board. Were there any significant issues or

initiatives that you undertook with the Board when you were on at George Mason?

M: No, I can’t recall anything. I was only on the Board one term there. I don’t remember

when that time period was. It was about the time Bill was in law school I believe. I’ve forgotten

29

what year exactly—what year or years he was at George Mason but he took an evening course at

George Mason.

T: After your retirement from Hercules, did you go into private practice again?

M: I hooked up with Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel, which is one of the leading law firms

here in the city. I was with them for about five or six years. After five or six years I decided it

was time to hang it up. Then I felt myself somewhat at loose ends and I made a tie with Stewart

and Associates as it was called at that time. It’s now called the Stewart Law Firm. Gordon

Stewart who started the firm was a W&L graduate. That’s how I got the hook onto it.

T: What type of work were you doing with them—patent work or more general corporate?

M: No, I really didn’t do much with them at all. They were primarily a tax firm.

T: This interview today will become part of the Turk Pre-Law Program website, which is

available to our pre-law students. What would you tell students who are thinking about going to

law school? Do you still think it’s a profession that’s worthy of students pursuing?

M: I certainly think it is a noble profession, but it bothers me to see pages and pages in the

yellow pages of advertising. I know the Supreme Court says that that’s permissible, but I just

think it’s inappropriate and I think plaintiff’s bar has gotten totally off the ranch.

T: Some people say that we’re a litigious society—that we’re sue happy—that everyone’s

been told they’re a victim and there’s a pay day. Do you think that’s the fault of the plaintiff’s

bar?

M: I think it’s the fault of plaintiff’s bar because, for example, 90%—I’m convinced that

90% of the claimants from asbestosis, whatever the disease might be claimed to come from

asbestos exposure. I’m convinced that 90% of it is bogus.

30

T: That the plaintiffs have been told by their attorneys they’re injured and they have found

doctors to confirm it.

M: Right.

T: They’re going after it just for the fees. What do you think we could do as a profession to

stop these frivolous lawsuits?

M: I don’t know what you can do to change it other than shame these lawyers into a different

type of conduct. Don’t get me wrong, I think if a person has been genuinely injured that they are

entitled to compensation, but some of these verdicts are absurd and often I don’t think there has

been any injury or at least any proven injury. I had a little experience in the asbestos cases. They

were bogus in 90% of the cases. I will relate to you an incident. We were involved in the Agent

Orange litigation. Judge Weinstein [of the Southern District of New York where all the cases had

been consolidated] tried to settle the cases over a weekend. This was in 1984. He didn’t want to

try the case. That was for sure. He said send somebody with authority to settle it—for each one

of the defendants. We were a major defendant. We weren’t as major as Dow and Monsanto . We

finally settled the case and I remember very vividly the—we had gotten down to the final nitty

gritty - and I said well what are the plaintiff’s themselves think about this? One of the plaintiff’s

attorneys —and I can almost quote him—he said I think the plaintiffs are useless baggage. In

other words they provided a method to get into court. They didn’t give a damn about the

plaintiffs or about their injuries.

T: They were just a tool by which to make claims. OK, so we were talking about being

involved in Agent Orange.

M: Right. We were one of the principal defendants. There were about five or six defendants

all told. The way the product got its name was per government specification. You could only put

31

an orange band around the—you packed it in 50 gallon drums I think. It may have been a

hundred gallons. But you could only put an orange band around them. It had to be the width and

go all the way around the drum.

T: Hence, the nickname.

M: Hence, the nickname. Had nothing to do other than that. It had nothing to do with the

product. And, so, that puts me a little ahead of my story. Judge Weinstein had set the trial to

begin on that Monday morning. And he summoned all the defendants there—everyone--and said

he wanted to have somebody who was able to bind the defendant [re settlement]. He was going

to keep us there around the clock to see if we could settle. And it was during that negotiation that

one of the plaintiff’s attorneys said that the plaintiffs are just useless baggage. But, anyway, on

Friday afternoon I went into Giacco’s office, Giacco being the CEO at the time, and I said, “Al,

we’ve got to have somebody in New York to join in this negotiation.” And he said,” well, you

know the drivers and you know the car so just get a car and go up there.” I said, “what is my

authority?” He said, “well, I don’t want you go give away anymore than you have to, but we

can’t fight it alone. So if the others decide to settle we’ve got to go along with them.” And he

said, “if you would, call me early Monday morning and let me know what the status is.” Well we

finally reached a settlement about 3 or 4 o’clock Monday morning. I agreed that even though it

was more than our share I agreed that we would pay 18 million. The total settlement was 180

million. I agreed that we would pay 18 million of the 180 million even though it was more than

our share.

T: When you say share do you mean market share in terms of the total amount produced?

M: Yeah, well that and also the amount of dioxin that was in our product versus the dioxin

[in their products] —that’s what caused it to be toxic even though there was never any real

32

scientific evidence that it caused any harm at all other than extreme cases of acne. But, it took on

a life of its own.

T: Did the Hercules version of Agent Orange have less dioxin in it than the others?

M: Yes. Considerably [less] as a matter of fact. We had a real “jury-rigged” plant—broken

down—and you couldn’t get the pressure up high enough. It was the pressure that created the

dioxin. You couldn’t get the pressure up in our facility high enough to create dioxin or to create

in detectable amounts. Well, that’s probably more than you want to know about the product. But

anyway Giacco would ask me to call him. This is in the spring of 1984. He had asked me to call

him. However it went whether we settled or whether we didn’t. So I called him early Monday

morning. I probably got him out of bed. I said, “well Al, we settled.” He said, “how much did we

settle for?” And I said, “18 million.” He said, “that isn’t too bad. What’s our share?” I said, “Al

that is our share.”

T: And then what did he say?

M: Well, I think he swallowed the telephone. He said, “well how much is it going to cost us

—our share? Have you resolved the issue with the insurance company?” I said, “yes , they were

here and they’re gonna pick up the bulk of it but—and as I figure it it’s gonna cost us between

three and half and four cents per share.” He said, “we can hide that much. This will put it behind

us?” And I said, “yep.” He said, “well that’s good.” So he never second guessed me on anything.

T: It shows how much he respected your opinion.

M: Right. Never, ever, ever, second guessed.

T: Now, would you say it was the Agent Orange litigation that was the most significant

litigation [for Hercules] or was it asbestos?

33

M: Well, asbestos, we are still a player in it, I think. Ashland [company which purchased

Hercules] is now. We never marketed any product that exposed anyone to asbestos. We made a

product that was used to cover tanks as an insulation for storage tanks. It was a—once it was

encapsulated - you couldn’t get the asbestos out. Now if you sawed into the product you would

have some asbestos that could fly out, but other than that—that was our total exposure.

T: What was the name of the product? Do you remember?

M: It was made by two Hercules subsidiaries that we had bought. The subsidiary was

HAVEG [he spelled this out]. I think the name of the product was some version of that.

T: I don’t recognize that name. I used to have in my little deposition notebook the names of

50 companies and their products. Because a lot of times what plaintiff’s counsel would do during

their direct examination of their own witnesses - they’d only focus on the defendants [companies

and their products] in the lawsuit. And then I’d come back and s ask the names of those

companies that weren’t in the litigation but whose products would have been at the job site. But

it’s when asbestos litigation started they went after the big fish who made the products which

were inherently dusty—pipe insulation, block insulation. Well, you run through all those

[companies] and bankrupt those. Johns Manville knew as early as 1934 asbestos was dangerous.

So you had people who had the knowledge.

M: They knew when?

T: As early as 1934.

M: Oh, really?

T: Some industrial studies that they did and then they hid—so you had some bad actors who

knew there were some problems who made the products that released all the asbestos and then

they get bankrupted. And then you start going after people who made things like roofing tar

34

where it was encapsulated and there was no way you could release[asbestos dust] and unless you

sawed through it after it was dry and it would release the minimal amount of dust, but these are

the actors who are left standing. And then you get these juries who see some poor guy who is

sick—who is legitimately sick—and probably the products who hurt him were made by the

defendants who are no longer on the list [who are bankrupt]. And I think the juries just say to

themselves, “well here’s a deep pocket.” They used asbestos—we don’t care what the experts

say. They must have hurt him. Let’s pay him.

M: And a lot of it came out of the exposure from asbestos in the shipyards.

T: Yes.

M: And that should have been clearly a government responsibility.

T: Yes.

M: They refused to step up to the plate and make it their responsibility.

T: All those navy ships they were spraying insulation into the bulkheads. And they were

doing that until the mid to late 70s.

M: Right.

[END OF INTERVIEW]

35