The record-union., 1896-03-13

WASHINGTON, March u. The
House Committee on Pacific Railroads
to-day heard c. p Huntington of the
Southern Pacific Railroad.
In opening, Mr.. Huntington said he
was not accustomed to public speak
ing, and would ask the attention Of the
committee but for a short time. The
story of the Pacific railroads was an old
one, but he had jotted down a few mat
ters which ne wished to lay before the
committee. The Central Pacific, he
said, had complied with every previs-
ion of the statute. 1t had performed not
only its contract with the Government,
but with individuals The property
had been kept clean, and the Govern
ment debt had not been embarrassed.
The officers of the company desire and
intend to pay all the principal and as
much interest as possible.
He did not favor Government owner
ship. A great many people in Califor-
MIA wanted this. AS railroad man, he
did not object to it, but he did not think
the Government could do worse.
The provisions Of the so-called Smith
or Frye bills pending in this Congress
in the main meet the approval of the
officers of the company. The officers
of the company think that in following
this line they could. pay upon the prin-
cipal of this indebtedness for the first
ten years the sum Of 100000 per an
mum; for the second ten years 100000
per annum, and the balance of the debt
at $750,000 per annum, and with inter-
est to be paid semi annually at the rate
of per cent.
To secure this Indebtedness the COM
pany proposed to give its mortgage
upon all the property it has of every
kind and description, and is perfectly
willing the most stringent provisions
to secure permanent performance of the
obligation shall be inserted in any bill.
The question of the time of extension
was not specially material, so the debt
was made safer, better secured and In
process of gradual extinguishment by
frequent payments on the principal
and interest on the deferred payments.
Boatner calledethe witness attention
to the great opposition in California to
the settlement of Pacific Railroad mat
ters except by foreclosure, and asked
how he accounted for this
Huntington replied that a large ma
iority of the people of California fa-
vored the roads and wanted to see a
Just settlement made. There were a few,
however, who were against the roads.
They were bright, smart men. They
had grievances. What these grievances
were he could tell, but it would take
long time, and they were matters which
the company would not care to go into.
Boatner then asked him to explain
how it was that the California dele
cation in Congress-one man except
ed-were against the roads.
In replying to this question Mr.. Hunt
ington referred to the elections of sew
eral years ago. He said that one man
complained bitterly to him when Con-
gressman English defeated him, stat
ing that if the Pacific roads had helped
him a little he could have defeated
English Mr. Huntington told him
that the roads were not in politics.
How is it, Boatner asked, that
the press of the State are against the
roads?"
Mr.. Huntington replied that seven
eighths of the press were in favor of
the roads.
johnson asked him why he used the
word grievances in referring to the
objections to the roads, and wanted to
know what he meant by it, and if it
was not misleading.
Several members of the committee OBJ
iected to going into the matter, and
Mr. Huntington replied that those who
had grievances were those who had
no business. These, he said, were the
class of people who complained.
In reply to a question by Powers of
Vermont the witness said he was will
ing to have the Southern Pacific Com
pany. "a solid affair" granted the pro-
posed extension bonds
In reply to a further question, he
said the roads could not carry out the
proposition advanced by the Reilly
bill of last Congress.
The committee adjourned until Mon
day next.