The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-10-04
GOVERNOR A WITNESS
ATTORNEY HARRIS PUTS A POINTED
QUESTION To THE EXECUTIVE.
Interesting Tits Between Lawyers i'm
the Union Hallway Tax Case
Attorney-GeneraI's Snort.

Governor Matthews and Auditor of State
Henderson were the important witnesses
In the Union railway tax case yesterday.
Auditor Henderson occupied part OF the
morning, and did not conclude his state
ment until 4:s0 o'clock yesterday afternoon
He was followed by Governor Matthews,
who occupied the rest of the day and part
of last night. The cross-fire and bantering
of the attorneys on both sides was unusu-
ally warm yesterday. The first outbreak
occurred shortly after Auditor Henderson
began his testimony. Attorney Harris, for
the railway company, was quoting a perth
nent paragraph from a record which lay
before the witness. While he was in the
act of pointing out a particular line, at
torney Ketcham deliberately arose, walked
over to the table and closed the book. At
torney Harris remarked that the act was a
bit abrupt. and was told by the States at
torney that he had intended to be abrupt.
The State set up the contention that the
plaintiff had no right to ply its questions
from that particular record. Judge Rein
hard declined to entertain the objection
and the case proceeded. Yesterday morn
ing the court ruled to admit all evidence
tending to show all that came before the
board in 1891, when the disputed assessment
of the railroads was fixed. This ruling, the
attorneys say, was a most important one.
? Auditor Henderson testified that the Tax
Board of 1891 had based its assessment on
the Indianapolis Union and Belt railway
largely upon the value given by Poor's
Railway Manual and the statement Of A.
c. Harris. attorney for the road. He
thought that the returns made by the COM
pany showed the road to be worth $1,7O0,-
600. Poor's Manual rated it at something
like s., $780, 0. This included the Union Sta
ton and the Belt railroad and equipment.
The witness thought that the assessment
of 100000 was an honest one.
On cross-examination Mr.. Henderson told
how the late Governor Hovey had, in 1881,
expressed much disgust over the assess
ment of the previous year. He character
lied the previous assessment as a. fraud
and an outrage. Mr.. Henderson admitted
that he knew of the Union Railway Com
pany having a bonded debt of S,U0,0M and
he admitted that it must be a frst-class
could be negotiated. He remembered that,
in 1890, the total railroad assessment
amounted to 100000 and a year later the
same property was assessed at $3.50, 0o0, 600.
The State proved by the Auditor that, in
1890 and 1891, officials of the Union Rail-
way Company made affidavit that the Union
Station cost but SAC, 000. and have since as
serted that it cost $500. 600 to erect the struc-
ture. Throughout the testimony of Auditor
Henderson Encouragement Smith was I'M
usually noisy. At the close of the Auditors
evidence there was some warm contro-
versy during which attorney Pickens re-
marked:
Smith, If you will give him an oppor-
tunity."
"why, I'm astonished,' snorted the At
torney-general, that's the first intelligent
idea you have got off in this case"
81 think it is the first one you have been
able TO appreciate" retorted the attorney
for the railroad company.
Governor Matthew's chief testimony was
given at the night session. He testified that.
since 1891, he had been a member of the
State Tax Commission. He had never been
value of the Belt railway before he entered
public life. He had often patronized the
railway by shipping over 't when he was
ernor said that in arriving at his concll-
sions as to the value of the property he
had not depended entirely upon the argu-
ment or the attorneys. He had kept an eve
open and had conversed with disinterasted
persons. He had heard President ingalls,.
OF the Big sour system, say that the Union
runway mad no income. but he had under
stood that the rental value of the Union
and Belt railway and Union Station was
SliO.WU a year. This amount he had under
ing privileges and he considered il eoniva-
lent to an income.
Mr.. Harris-Did 1 not, Governor. in 1892.
say speeihcalIy what the Union railway
Governor Matthews-Yes, sir, 1 think you
Mr.. Harris-Did you believe. when 7
came before the board ard stated what it
cost. that L way trying to deceive you?
Governor Matthew'S had the impress
sion that you were not making a full re-
port, perhaps.
Mr.. Harris-That is not what I asked
you. l will have the question read.
Governor Matthews-That is a very pc
culiar question.
Mr.. Harris-Well. you put q. in that atti-
tude. Do you want to be understood, Gov
ernor, that you thought 1 was misleading
the board?
Governor Matthews-No I would not like
to think that. but the attorneys In maxi
ing their arguments
Mr.. HarrisI don't want to speak about
others; / am the one In question. I am
known pretty well in this community.
whether for good or bad / shall not saw
here. / know how 1 have tried TO live.
and
Mr.. Ketcham Mr..
Harris insists on throwing his personality
into this case | submit that the witness
should be allowed to go on.
Governor Matthew'S do not want Mr..
Harris TO understand me as rejecting upon
his personal integrity. He was before the
board as an attorney for a railroad COM
pany. / would place implicit confidence in
him. but In forming the judgments / was
compelled TO form / could not take his
statement.
The court adjourned the session at 3
O'Clock at the conclusion of the testimony
of Governor Matthews. Although the Gov
ernor was called by the railroad company
the State is exceedingly well pleased with
the character of evidence adduced. To-
day the railway company will call w. r.
McKee to the stand, with the intention
OF showing that Poor's Manual was mac
curate previous to 1898.
|