The San Francisco call., 1895-10-19
O.. P. HUNTIEGToN's ANSWER.

Coils p Huntington has answered for
THE CALL number of questions about the
Central Pacific Railroads debt to the
Government. OF course, Mr.. Hunting
toms view of the matter is not
the view of men who are not
railroad magnates and who consider that
their obligation TO pay an honest debt is
not discharged by finding way to avoid
TIE payment; but it is interesting as
giving the point of view of the people who
have manipulated one of the most ingeni-
Gus if not the biggest of schemes of spolia-
ton of Federal treasury on record.
The Government loaned the corporation
of which Mr. Huntington is the head S27,-
500, 900 to build a railroad. This was the
foundation of four of the largest fortunes
in the world. Men are usually grateful
for the capital that gives them their
start in life; but these corporations
have neither paid a cent of the ORR
ginal Indebtedness, nor of the thirty
years interest, which has doubled
the original debt. The Government was
as indulgent as the most generous of
patrons. Its proteges said they needed
another thirty millions and the Govern
ment permitted them to borrow this and
give as security mortgage which took
precedence of its own. If individuals in
stead of a government and a corporation
had been the parties to such an arrange
ment the original loan would have been a
debt of honor, and as such would have
been paid, no matter at what sacrifice.
In his answers to the questions pro-
pounded by THE CALL Mr.. Huntington
does not take this view. His main propo-
sition is that by the development of the
country and the convenience Of a trans
continental road the United States Gov
ernment has profited more than the
amount of the loan. 1t is the old familiar
argument on "the equities" used in past
years by Creed Raymond for the railroad,
in which he figured out that the Govern
ment was really in debt to the corporation
siOn the point of the payment of the
claim for services rendered by the railroad
Mr.. Huntington says:
As TO what the Government owes the South
ern Pacific Company-a corporation entirely
distinct from the Central Pacifc-I have no
doubt the Government will some time pay it.
and as most of it is now drawing interest, the
longer the Government waits, of course the
more it will have to pay.
The Southern Pacific Company leased
the Central Pacific and assumed its busi-
ness for the very purpose of defeating the
Thurman act, one of the provisions of
which was that the services rendered by
the railroad should be credited on the debt.
The theory that change of name changes
the Central Pacifc's obligation is one of
the minor beauties of the problem of the
Pacific railroads.
Mr.. Huntington's reply to the question
of a moral obligation to pay a debt, that
the Government insists on its strict legal
rights and that, therefore, the company
Will stand on the letter of the law, as he
reads it, is something new in moral
philosophy.
'Sir," says the gentleman of honor, ''you
are not a gentleman, so l will stab you in
the back"
There is another point in Mr.. Hunting
toms statement that is worthy of second
thought. He writes:
Certainly I, as one of the builders of the
Central Pacific, would not do the work again
for ten times the money that was made out of
the venture, as the builders out of all that
they had for the creation of the road, could not
for years after its completion pay the debts
that were incurred in the building.
Before he and his partners built that
road Mr.. Huntington was a moderately
prosperous grocer with perhaps hundred
thousand dollars; now he is rated as fifty
times millionaire. The view expressed
above is the view of the multi-millionaire,
not of the merchant of moderate fortune.
Ii he had not built that road Mr.. Hunting
ton would probably still be weIl-to- do
merchant.