The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-08

must be divorced" Incidentally he also
said upon that memorable occasion, anC
at q subsequent one when he was being
banGueted, that the offices at Fourth and
Townsend streets must not be the Mecca
toward which politicians running fol
Poundmaster or better turned their steps
and faces.
Railroad Commissioner La Rue has long
cherished Mr.. Huntington's lapsus Ingua
and yesterday at the injunction suit
brought by the railroad company against
the Railroad Commissioners to prevent
their making a horizontal reduction of s
per cent on wheat rates he embodied the
gcntleman's salutatorv in an affidavit, sub
stantiatIng numerous other affidavits to
the effect that 1t was a well-known fact
that for years one OF the greatest items OF
expense incurred by the railroad company
was the purchase of public officials to
legislate in accordance with the corpora
tons will.
Attorney General Fitzgerald and Attor-
ney Hayne addressed the court in support
of the attdavlts.
To be sure these affidavits, or rather the
pointed clauses OF them, have so far done
Mr.. Huntington little harm. The fact
that they were read in court before bril-
liant galaxy of LEGAL gentlemen and few
reporters cuts little figure, excepting that
they are now food for publication. Other
wise Judge McKenna deemed that they
were inadmissible az evidence, sustaining
the objection TO them of Mr.. Herrin, the
railroads chief attorney, that they were
based on "information and be lief.'
The days session was exceedingly dry,
the Huntington boomerang and the point
made by Judge McKenna that the report
of Congressional committee could be
ignored in his court, being the only two
enlivening features.
The earnings of the Southern Pacific
Company and its ramihcations, however,
were brought to light and are herewith
given; also those interesting portions of
the affidavits read, but stricken out by the
court. They read as follows:
Atlantis say upon information and belief
that great part of the bonded Indebtedness
OF the road was not honestly incurred in the
construction and equipment OF the roads, ana
that neither the principal nor the interest on
such debts is a legitimate charge upon the in
terror commerce of this State, and that the
amount OF such bonded Indebtedness does not
constitute just basis or criterion for transport
tauOn charges; and that the capital repre-
lenled by the shares of stock is almost wholly
Fictitious and for sources OF atlantis 1nfor!na-
ton, and in these regards and as evidence of
the facts atlantis refer 10 the report OF the Pa
eitc Railroad Commission, consisting of
Aessrs. Anderson, Paterson and Littler made
70 the Congress OF the United States, in the
year 1897, and to the evidence taken by said
commission and the message of the President
OF the United States in regard to the said re-
port and proceedings Of said commission, all
OF which is contained in the volumes to g
OF Senate Executive Session Documents, First
Session, Fifteth Congress-"
At this period of the reading Attorney
Herrln objected 10 the clause of the al
hdavlt that IL was inadmissible, inasmuch
as II stated no facts as TO the bonded in
debtedness of the road and the allegations
were barren of proof.
hat rl
was prlma facIe evidence itself, as it was
taken from a public document printed
upon the authority of Congress, to which
1t had been transmitted by the President
of the United States.
Judge McKenna held that the facts of
the expenses of the road and the debts not
incurred honestly should be admitted in
evidence as he believed that acts OF com
mission of Congress did not suspend the
rules OF evidence. He, therefore, sus-
tanned the objection in all the clause ex-
cepting that portion wherein occurred fig