Birmingham age-herald., 1895-03-10
SENATOR MlLNER
REPLIES TO HON. F. P. o'BRTEN's LETTER.
 NEWCASTLE, March 8, 1895.

AaE- HERALD of March 8, and also the Montgomery letter in the same paper of February 20, evidently written or inspired by yourself, and in justice to my constitu- ents, who have right to inquire into my actions in the legislature, make the fol- lowing statements:
 In the first place you state that newspa- per cores poudence is distasteful to you. How much more so must 1t be to man not interested in newspaper? Be that as It may, you have begun the attack upon me, and am compelled to answer in calm and dispasciouate statement of facts as they appear to me.
 In reply to your allegations ''that some who were first and foremost in endeavoring to shape local legislation to serve private ends are endeavoring to dodge the inev- jtable, '' will state that the senate records will show that excepting the four or hve bills offered by Mayor Van Hoose and intro- duced in both ends of. the capitol on the same day, introduced only four bills two to relieve the county of Jefferson from paying the extra compensation 10 Judge Banks and Solicitor Ferguson of S100o annually, which passed the senate, but died in the house; one for two mounted policemen to patrol the roads leading to the city with view of preventing the hold ups around our city (this bill also died in the house) and another amending the char ter of the Mobile and West Alabama rail-
 
 be madeout of these bills you can make the best of it. Judging from the number of bills sent over to the senate my col leagues must have introduced 100 bills h the house during the session. Nearly all sent over were passed in the senate, except those did not feel justified in passing, which 1 will refer to hereafter. Some were amended, will admit, at the request of my constituents, but h no case except by the consent of my colleagues in the house f.nro f tho In Eo the last day of the session, bad thirty one bills of my house colleagues on my private calendar-O Brien twelve, John twelve and the four others seven. On that day had only the right to call up one bill in the senate under the rules. You came over to the senate that day and marked on my cal endar the bills you wanted called up and passed, and notwithstanding had in my own right only one call l, by beg ging my fellow senators for their except two, as your annotations on my calendar show. 1 did everything l could consistently to please my colleagues in the . house. Your next charge against me IS that entered into conspiracy to prevent the defeat of the alien railroad bill, and re- fer to several mysterious communications made to you by divers and sundry parties about deals, but in no instance do you con nect me either by word or deed with these so-called deals. l cannot account for M but utterly deny doing or saying any thing to any human being which would in any way connect me with any such deals or conspiracies. Whatever did in that matter was done openly on the floor oi the senate or in the committee of the senate to which l belonged. The bill was intro- duced by Mir. Pettus and referred 10 the committee on corporations, of which was member. President Pettus appeared be- fore us and explained its provisions, and nff inn Ii n m report was made. Two days after it came up in the senate for passage MT. Pettus again explained it. Hon. Mims Walker, chairman, declining to speak for the com for the committee, which you know as well as I do is always ex- pected of a committee reporting general bill. l stated, as l understood the matter then and as understand it now, that the Alabama and Chattanooga railroad was owned and controlled by an English company, domiclled in London, but that the majority of the stock of this company was now owned in the United States; that on the s0th of October, 1894, the stock holders met in London to give their proxy 10 vote for directors under the Alabama charter at Blrmin gham. The majority stockholders in the United States sent their proxy to London to vote at said meet- ing of stockholders. This proxy was ut terly discarded and the minority sent their proxy to be voted in solido at the Birming- ham meeting. Under the decision of our own supreme court in Memphis and Charleston case, railroad corporation owning stock in another railroad corpora tion could not vote their stock in solido in that corporation. l recollect well asking President Pettus in the committee room how the Louisville and Nashville Railroad company voted E, ,0o0, ,CO0 of stock owned by them in the South and North Alabama Railroad company, aud thus controlled nd mi n He said under tl0 law they could not, unless the stock was seg- regated and voted by the individual own CTS themselves, as was proposed in the allen railroad bill. Ithereupon asked him to prepare bill covering this point for railroads in the United States owning rail- roads in Alabama, which he promised to do. l stated that this majority stock of the London company owned In the United States was matter of contention between the Cincinnati, Hamilton and Dayton and the Southern Railway com pany, and which ever bought this stock at the sale in March would wish to control the Alabama and Chattanooga railroad themselves, so as not 10 allow the minority English stockholders to control 1t as now by sending their proxy here under the seal of that company, which is, of course, in their possession, and voting 1t in solido 1n Alabama. l thought then, under the ex- planation given me of the decision of our supreme court in the Memphis and Charles ton case by President Pettus, that a similar law should be passed affecting the majority owners in the United States of railroed property in Alabama as well as in Eng land. The above was in substance my speech. The bill was passed unanimously believe in the senate and went over to the house. About this time MT. London appeared in Montgomery and began his fight on the bill. 1 had voted for it twice before he began bis fight and made one speech in the senate for it. In a few days after a house bill precisely the same as the senate bill came over to the senate and was WAS member. Mr. London, and no one else opposed to the bill, appeared before that committee, nor did MT. Pettus appear