The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-03-10
IN DEFENSE OF PAUL MORTON.
Mr.. Norton Says w. A. Bisseu Used
Language Attributed to Him.

Chicago, March 10.=The Tribune
prints the following letter from Il. ]
/ Norton, solicitor of the Santa Fe coast
lines. The letter is dated from Los
Angeles and is as follows:
| Editor of the Tribune: In your is
sue of February IA there is an edi-
torial headed Paul Morton" based
upon a so-called indictment of him by
| the Independent, in which you put in
his mouth words which he never ut
tered. and then criticise him for it,
You say:
Mr.. Morton says that in his official
capacity he tried the costly expert
| ment of being honest" and abandoned
it. For how long? Is it only costly
to be honest in the railroad bust
ness, and can one afford it in other
kinds of bEsiness2 Perhaps Mr. Nor
ton should not be held to too strict an
account for his careless use of Ian
guage. He did not weigh his words
carefully. He meant to be as honest
as he conveniently could be-as hon
est as the other Romans. as he
felicitously denominates his competit-
ors in the railroad business. are.
The language which you employ,
discovered from the context. was used
at Los Angeles by w. A. Bissell, as
sistant traffic manager of the Atchison,
Topeka & Santa Fe Railway company,
in answer to question put by me
during the trial in the United States
circuit court of what is commonly
Morton never spoke it.
Moreover, the language as distorted
would work an injustice to Mr.. Bissell
if it were ascribed to him. because
referred to were honest. So that you
may understand what I mean by this
I quote from the record of the court
(page 1882 the exact language of
Mr.. Bissell and put it in the setting
from which malice or partisanship
has torn it.
Q-Had the business of citrus fruit
shipping been leaving you before you
established this practice of routing?
A.-Yes, sir We made several en-
deavors-we tried the costly expert
inent of being honest in this thing.
living uD to the law as we understood
it and declining to pay rebates; and
we lost so much business that we
mans did, and as there seemed to be
an idea that the car lines were exempt
from the interstate law, which prOvid-
ed imprisonment for railroad men
range to do our business through an
outside car line.
In explanation of the foregoing lam
guage it may be said that the record
of the case shows that at the time of
which Mr.. Bissell was speaking hard
Iy a carload of citrus fruit left Cali
fornia upon which some sort of rebate
was not given by the private car line
companies from their refrigerator
charges or from excess mileage allow
ed them by eastern railroads. The
private car line companies had &C
quired by rebates almost complete
control of the citrus fruit traffic and
they sold the routing of it in open
market, carriers that respected the
law being stripped of business. To
break up the rebate practice the mi
tial carriers took charge of the rout-
ing, and declared that they would not
allow a carload of fruit to go upon the
rails of any connecting carrier found
guilty of giving rebates or of buying
business from the car line companies
by means of mileage allowances The
result was that one of the most cor
rupt and formidable schemes of rebate
giving that had ever existed in this
country, vehemently denounced by the
United States circuit court was I'M
mediately and completely broken
1t was in discussing this situation
that Mr. Bissell said that the Santa F'e
company, which alone owned refriger-