The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-24

uhs oiered In evidence a transcript o! a
n mh OF the record In the case nf the
Wharf company against the city OF Gal
weston. In which. III resisting he collection
OF municipal taxes. said Wharf company
pleaded that 1t was a railroad before the
supreme court. and upon objection by de-
tenfant. the commissioners took the tran
script under Amusement and adjourned I'M
vi b. III.
AT the afternoon session. Mr.. Gresham.
on cross -cxamination. said he believed that
the La Porte road paid the Wharf company
FOR each of its cars passing over the Wharf
companys tracks. Plaintiff objected to lar.
Gresham's belief and defendants asked that
the auditor of the La Porte road he sub
rocned to appear and testify as to the
fact In controversy
John M, Bird. secretary and Treasurer of
the Gulf. Colorado ana Santa Fe railroad
heving been sworn was asked by plain
TN rs attorneys TO produce the contract he
tween his road and the Wharf company and
reuliod that he could not as he knew of
no such contract Knew Of no arrange
nient by which the Santa fe road runs its
cars over the Wharf compapys tracks ex-
cent the Wharfage tariffs which are pub
llshod semi-morthly In the Galveston
News. Thought the Santa Fc paid one
thlrd OF .he expense OF operating the wharf
company rallioad.
Thomas Doyle, having been sworn, tes-
tifed that he had been for forty years
engaged IN the business o. traclllaying,
bridge building and railroad yard con-
structions. aud had for fourteen years been
suDerintendenl of the Galveston Wharf
railroad. Had never heard it called a belt
line before this case came up. Would him
self call 1t terminal road II is oper-
ated by the roads terminating at Calves
ton that is they run their own ears over 1t
and haul them with their own engines, and
the yardmastor is In the employ of the
railroads who pro rate the payment OF his
salary among themselves. The Wharf com
pany exercises no control over the cars
running on the Wharf company tracks.
Had never seen any difference in the way
TIT railroads operated the Wharf compi.iy
! tracks and the way they operated their
own tracks. Cross-examined, Mr.. Doyle
said the Wharf company track was built
to dispense Nllh drayage and expedite tho
movement OF export aud import freight, In
answer to Commissioner Mayneld. Mr.
Doyle said that In his opinion a belt line
is line roaming around the outskirts of a
CITY and connecting different trunk lines
In mis- opinion the Wharf railroad oNer
c,sos none OF the functions of a belt line.
The extract from the transcript referred
to in the morning proceedings MAS ieof-
| ferod In evidence by plaintiffs and fled
with the other papers in this case.
| Plaintiffs also offered copy OF petition
! in an application for an injunction in a
| case of the Wharf company against the
| Gulf. Colorado and Santa Ne and Gcfcnd
ants objected on the ground that declara
! tons of officers Of the Wharf company in
! case wherein II was sought TO restrain
! the Santa Fe from paraliellinS its tracks
could not under any rule Of evidence be
used in determining the justice OF a com
! plant Of w. l.. Moody Il Co. against the
| Wharf company for alleged discrimination
| In the matter OF trackage charges; further
they objected to the introduction of dec
| larations made prior TO tho enactment OF
| the law creating the commission as to thu
! character OF the Wharf company railroad
Governor Hogg retorted that he aid not
offer the petition for the purpose of inter
posing the plea Of res adItdlcata or The
plea of estopel. but that he was simply
offering the solemn declaration of an Off
Ger OF the Wharf company as TO the char
acter OF the railroad operated by said com
| pany The petition was admitted and set!
up the plea that the Wharf company ha
complied with its charter and IS operating
a railroad
plaintiffs also submitted certified lis
Of 15l railroads OF different classes char
tered by the State Of Texas. among whicl
the Wharf company railroad does not ap
pear, said list having been made up from
the record of secretary OF state. Defend
ants objected on the ground that the lis
was incomplete; that this was not the wa!
to prove the existence OF charter and tina
the classification was based purely upor
the opinion of the secretary of state. TIT
lists were filed with the understanding tina
II defendants later on produced court de
cisions. precludng their admissioiii:y
they might he thrown out, and plaintin
| closed.
Defendants introduced j w. Petheram
chief engineer of the Missouri, Kansas an'
Texas ap an expert. objected to by plain
tins. but admitted by the commission
Knew where the Galveston Wharf coinpan!
railroad is. and considered that 1t per
formed the service OF furnishing roads ter
minating at Galveston with facilities 70
reaching industries, wharves, etc, beyon'
their terminals. In his opinion 1t perform
belt line service. Cross examined he SAT-
the Chicago Belt railroad was the only bel
road he knew anything about and tina
mostly from hearsay. Had never heard tn
Wharf company railroad called a belt he
fore this investigation began. The Chi
cago Belt was the standard by which h
Judged the Wahrf company's road. IL tn
Chicago road is not belt the Wharf com
pany's road is not one. Did rot know o
his own information what the functions
performed by the Chicago Belt we're. lIa'
only read about 1t. Agreed With counse
for plaintiff that some OF the appirtcnance
Of the Wharf company railroad were ter
mjnal facilities for the roads terminatin
in Galveston. The Missouri, Kansas am
Texas owns no terminal, but uses the Gal
weston. Houston and Henderson and send
its cars over the Wharf company's track
10 reach the warehouses on the wharf.
MIR. Felt. resident engineer of the SAINT
Fe Mt Galveston. was also introduced n
an expert by the defendants and accepts
Iy the commission. In his opinion th'
Wharf company's tracks AFFORD "artial ter
miual facilities for passenger service AM
afford belt line facilities for freight service
Had never heard it classified before. hut h
would say that It performed the function
Of a belt railroad. Cross examined, he di
not know of any other belt line similar L
tbo Wharf company's road except In
nj BOSTON. which transfers freight from
railroads to wharyes Did not consider ~
warehouses on the wharf terminal facili
Ties. because they are not public ware
houses. In his opinion. Belt service is al
WAYS terminal service. but terminal servic
is moi necessarily belt service. he declared
The DALLAS Terminal company. so-called