The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-03-07
HIS READY ANSWERS
COllis Huntington Replies to MOrgan's
Questions.
AT THE RAILROAD HEARING
He Would Have IL Understood That
the Government Didn't Con-
struot the Road In Ques-
tion-His Creditors.


on Pacific railroads to-day resumed
consideration Of the Pacific railway
debt question. Huntington was present
but Senator Morgan was absent at the
beginning of the hearing. John Roo
ney. representative of the Junior bond
holders. was permitted to file brief in
opposition to the plans heretofore Of
fered for reorganization of the Pacific
roads. He advocated consolidation of
the Union Pscific and Central Pacific;
assessments on subordinate interests
for cash payment of first and second
mortgages and for management by the
government commissioners of fore
closure and reorganization Of these
properties.
When Morgan appeared a linguist
contest between himself and Hunting
ton began, the senator beginning i'm
mediately by asking Huntington as to
his objections to the Pattison report.
Huntington replied he objected to it
as a whole He admitted he had been
before the commission, but contended
the commission had certain theories
worked out and did not pay much
attention to his statements. II know"
he said, "all about the building of the
Central Pacific"
"It is not so much about the building
of the road" replied Morgan, 1--WE want
to know. as about what was made out
of it,"
I'VE did not" responded Hunting
ton, make any more than we were
allowed to make under the statutes"
Continuing as to a division, he said he
could divide what the two were inter-
Morgan-Can you do that when you
are on one side and the people on the
other side?
Huntington-I can.
Morgan-I am going to give you a
chance before we get through.
Referring to the construction of the
Southern Pacific to Yuma, Arizona,
| Huntington said Cotton was Interested
in that transaction and he (Hunting-
toni had nothing to do with the dis
| posal of his estate.
Did you not" asked Mr.. Morgan.
buy Mrs Colton's house in San Fran
cisco?"
| II did"
And did you not find Colton's
papers in the house?"
IT found the wall paper there"
But did you not find private papers
there and burn them?"
''If you will charge me with that /
| will answer"
"It is charged by men who have writ
ten to me; men as good as l am"
"Then they are good men,"
Huntington then asserted with much
emphasis that he neither found any of
Colton's papers in the house nor de-
ined as to his partnership with Mark
Hopkins in the hardware business in
San Francisco. He declared the hard
ware business was in no way connect
ed as a partnership with the railway
business. The firm, he said, loaned
money to railroads, also bought rail-
road securities which were divided be-
tween them as individuals. He said
Morgan was asking too much when he
asked him to give details of business
transacted 35 years ago. There had
been no general settlement of his and
Hopkins account upon the latter's s
death. but Mrs. Hopkins had gone on
as the representative OF her husbands s
interests in the railroads.
Mr. Huntington said in reply to ques-
tions that he had considerable means
outside of that invested in the hard
ware business which he put into the
construction of the Central Pacific. He
could not, however, remember how
much actual money he had put into
that construction. More than $4,000. 900
had been put into that company by
himself and his associates. but mucih
of the money had been borrowed, some
of it on the government bonds He
| resented, with some show of indigna-
tion, the question tending to show that
it was the government and not the
company who had conducted the con-
struction. saying that the company.
with resources legltimately placed at
their command, had constructed IT,.
Huntington said the road paid well for
the first 10 years and until the Atchison
and Northern Pacific had come in as
| competitors. >,
Morgan asked why the dividends had
not been put into sinking fund and
used in paying the government and
| first mortgage debt 10 which Hunt
ington replied that IL might have been
| done, except for the novelty of IL"
Such things are never done If. he add
ed. "the stock was entitled to its divi-
dend."
Senator Morgan referred to the fiuc-
| tuations in The stock as the result of
manipulation. but Huntington took ex-
ception to the use of the word. He
said there had been no manipulation,
and this is not a proper word 10 use" !"
| Huntington said he had sold stock pay
ing a dividend for 10 cents on the dol
lar. but declared in reply TO a question
that this was not done TO break the
market. He also declared that this
was not remarkable and that he had
made the sale because he wanted
| money.
Did you tell your broker 10 sell as
low down as ne could get?"
That is a question" replied Hunt