The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-24
ADJOURNED UNTIL MONDAY.
The Wharf Company Case in Prog
ress at Austin.
EXPERTS PLACED ON THE STAND
Some shy the Road Is n Terminal
While Others Aver It's n BcIt
Linc--PnrIss ON Legislation.

Austin, Texas, January 2s.--In the case
of w. l.. Moody g. Co. VS.. the Galveston
Wharf company the railroad commission
proceeded this morning with Colonel Moody
on the stand. An attempt of attorneys for
plaintiff to show by the witness that the
trackage charge is not collected in every
instance from consgnees was objected TO
by defendants. but the evidence was held
to be admissible and MIR. Moody said that
all the roads had demanded that he pay
the trackage except the La Porte. which
had absorbed said trsckage up to the be-
ginning of this investigation. but now re-
fused to do so.
Replying to u question by Judge Reagan,
MIR. Moody said he did not know whether
In other cases besides his own the track
age rate Is uniform and collected in every
case. Further questioning to bring out
that trackage is absorbed in some instances
and collected in others was ruled upon by
Judge Reagan as being irrelevant to the
question OF jurisdiction, whereupon Gov
ernor Ilogg contonded that the evidence
sought to be elected by such questioning
was to be used to establish the manner
road and its relation to the roads using
it's track and asked for ruling by the
whole commission. The commission retired
and after brief consultation ruled as
whole as Judge Reagan had done with re-
gard to the admlssibilty OF the evidence
at the present stage of the investigation
To establish the fact that the wharf rail-
road had been used and operated as
terminal Governor Hogg asked MIR Moody
If cotton had not been delivered to his
press at the commission rate of 90 cents
per 100 pounds without extra charge foi
trackage by the La Porte road and the an
swor was in the affirmative and Mr.. Moody
was excused.
MIR. Jens Moller, ship agent, was next
called to the stand. Asked TO tell how the
through rate on cotton from Texas common
points to Europe via Galveston was made
he replied that 1t was by adding the ocean
rate 10 tho commission rate of 90 cents
per 100 pounds plus the wharfage charge OF
10 cents per bale the latter being, how
ever, included in tho ships proportion OF
the through rate In other words, II there
was no wharfage charge the OCEAN rate
would be 10 cents bale lower. Had paid
no trackage since December year ago.
Paid no trackage whether his cotton was
exported or not Tho sheds which he used
on the Galveston wharf were built haf
| by the Wharf company and hai by MN
| self. When he wanted his cotton delivered
| to his shed he notified the railway people
and not the Wharf company people, and 1t
was handled over the wharf tracks by
crews and engines paid and operated jointly
I.by the roads terminating at Galveston. SAID
| ID ads did not have shed room sufficient OF
| their own to store the cotton they prlng
to Galveston. Did not charge consignees
storage himself, but charged each ship $loo
for the privilege of lying at his shed. AS FAR
| as his knowledge goes the revenues oil inc
Wharf company are derived solely from
wharfage This was objected TO on the
ground that the question at Issue was not
one of jurisdlction over the Wharf COM
many hut over the Wharf company rail-
| road Plaintiffs contended that 1t was COM
| petent for them to show that wharf charges
and track charges collected by the wharf
| company were separate ana dlstlhcl iol
the uurnose of establishing the nature OF
| the wharf railroad but the evidence was
ruled out and plaintiffs excepted. In arsu"
| ing this point Governor Hogg used the
| following Language, which caused those
present TO look at one another signlhcantiy'
| Eve propose, as we assert that we can
! TO show by this and all other snip agents
at Galveston. that they are compellcu 10
| nav or do pay, out of the through rates on
| cotton stunned from Galveston, the follow
/ ing division. /. Sixty-iive cents per nun
dred TO the railway. ,. Ten cents per nale
as Wharfage to the company. s. fiity
cents per hundred TO the ships. a. rive
cents a hundred as rebate 10 railic
managers And that the last item ex-
Mains why they are so stubbornly resist
ing the jurisdiction and control OF this
| commission by conteuding that the "aali
railway Is a belt line. A.
Cross examined by Mr.. Ball'nger, MT.
| Noller said that prior to Decemper war
ago he paid flexible trackase charge 10
the railroads on his cotton moving over
the wharf company tracks. lie paia s'ol
age on salt kept in the warehouse lei :
petual lease of which he heia lroin wv
Wharf company. on wheat coi,slsne" :"
Galveston the elevator storage ena' -
cludrs the Galveston Wharf company an
rond track charge. When cotton As neHV-
cred on the wharf or in wharf snens Wy
mark the railroads get receipt tpcr'luI
from the shin and collect the frelsht' '"lho
times receipts are given by snip ,roheIs
in the name OF fictitious SHIPS w - ~ V
is no reason why such cotton coui' hot We
rnilrcaded on cars and exported VIA new
Orleans New York or any other port s"lu
Mir Moller. Continuing, he stated mat al
cotton delivered on the wharf was Teale"
alihc. whether delivered by drays or VlicI
Wise mid not pay trackasc on uhcorh
pressed cotton delivered 10 the Moody prCss
for lis account. shin agents laid no track
age. 1t was his understan ing that NJ
railroads paid per car traehdge ltI ~
privilege of running their cars over .n 's
wharf tracks. Barge cotton was Iea'o,.
INST like other cotton on The wharf ana
the expense Of unloading 1t was pald p'
the Wharf company. ,-, n
Called to the stand, Hon waiter "a
lGrssham testified that nc nah slu''leu
civil engineering and had had experience
in the matter Of railroad constrnct'on' no
tablv in connection with the santa ~, "a,
Galveston and Western and the va I,rt'
railways. Thought he knew the difference
between. the different classes OF railr0aus
Had made the matter of terminal iae'il.iiet.
at Galveston a. study IN cohner',un ,o,
The railroad nroiects in which he had beer
Interested. and had stu lied the railroad
uu, stion as a member OF the Legislature
Colonel Gresham was offered AS an eSpV,
by The plaintiffs without objection iron
defeudants asked what his opinion oil w
Galveston Wharf company road 49, he sal'
he would consider It Il railroad oierT.e'
IN Give his reasons for said opinion. Mr.
Gresham said they were based upon MS 'N