The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-11-25

Net ..... =. 's-s t..s S......s. ''...' and the rights of the people of the State of Alabama. that. they would not object to issuing the injunction; that they would file no affidavits in opposi- tion thereto, and would not appeal therefrom. and so it was issued with out a contest.
 Injunction Issned Without Objection.
 And then find upon examining the record which hold in my hands, and I read the record before the Senate and House Committees on last Saturday, find these same attorneys bearing in mind the sacred obligations of the oath which they took when they entered torneys in answer to the allegation of that section of the bill upon which it's equity rests on the record itself ad- mitted that the only way by which the railroad could get adequate relief un- d4r the circumstances of the case would be by temporary injunction pending the ascertainment of the facts. In orr der that this fact may be made perfect 1y clear. will read the exact language of their answer on this point: "23. De- .fendants for answer to paragraph 23 of said bill say they admit that the pro- visions of the several acts of the Leg islature of Alabama set forth in said paragraph, are correctly stated therein. and they admit that the suspension of said rates by the institution of pro- ceedings for such purposes as provided by the Legislature of said state is the only adequate mode afforded the com plainant for asserting 8 defense to the same" There 1t fs, signed by the States own counsel: "A. M. Garber, Attorney General. Horace .Stringfeilow, R. w. Walker, Frank S. White. S. D. weakIey. H. c. Selheimer. Solicitors for defendants"
 Those attorneys. as far as l am ad- vised, have never uttered a word to the contrary. up to this good day. of the statements they made in that answer.
 That was filed on the srd of June. 1907. If tho suspension of those rates in that proceeding was the only ade- quate mode for the testing of the ques- ton as to the reasonableness of the rates on the srd of June when 1t was filed. want to ask you what has hap pened since then to change that fact? And in all seriousness, want to ask you again, what do you think of this assault upon an honest. upright judge for issuing an injunction, the right ieousness of which was admitted. upon Ia bill. the equity of which was con- fessed7
 LesisIating Case Dat of Court. j Auu aSdlnss T abk, why SHOulu lHis case be legislated out of court? Oh, but they say that the Democratic plat form demands this sacrifice. and we must obey the platform! We'll. now. my friends. think I have shown you that they have not obeyed its platform, the very first principle that Is laid down there. that we shall have a fair trial. and a fair hearing of that propo- sition before the courts of the country.
 The Georgia Rates.
 But come to another plank in that platform. which I say they are not obeying either in its letter, or in it's spirit. that provision of the platform that we shall have the Georgia rates. Now. want to discuss that proposition with you. because consider this whole proposition has->centered around the question of the Georgia rates. The Georgia rates are lower than in Ala Nbama on some things. and higher than the~Alabama. rates on other things and If you gave the Georgia rates you would lower the Alabama rates on the hings on which they are lower. That would be the Georgia rates. that would put us on an equality with them, but what do they propose? They propose out, of five thousand or six thousand rates in both States to select l1O of them in which the Georgia rates are lower and reduce ours to that level, but they absolutely impose c bar against raising those rates in Alabama on arr ticles where the Georgia rates are higher. That is what is proposed by this legislation.
 The conclusive, proof of this asser- ton Is that simultaneously. with the demand of Governor Conner, of Ala bama. for the Georgia rates. we heard the cry of Governor Smith. of Georgia, for the Alabama rates. Now neithe CT Conner of Alabama, nor Smith of Geor- gia, wanted what. they asked for. Ex- Actly what they did want was this: Conner wanted those Georgia rates which were lower than Alabama, and Smith wanted those Alabama rates which wree lower than Georgia. And so the great railroad interests of the two States which had contributed more than any single factor to their growth and prosperity. were to be crushed be- tween the upper and neither millstones of this monstrous proposition. I know of no better illustration of its inedual ity and unfairness than the old story of the white man and the Indian. who went hunting. The net results of their days venture was one turkey and one buzzard. When they started to return home there. was a controversy as to how they could divide the game There upon the white man said: 'T tell vol, what I will do. will take the turk ey and you take the buzzard. or you take the buzzard and will take the turkey. :" to which the Indian replied. Me no get turkey. airy time."
 Now. I want to prove that assertion 70 you. and I think 1t we'll that vol, should know it, I think 1t is well that the truth should be stated, and I ann going to state 1t. just as the truth is shown by the records. They tell vol, that the tonnage of Alabama is Rreater than the tonnage of Georgia, and th at is true. But they omit to tell you tbat tonnage is an expense to the railroad that the thing upon which this feat turns, and upon which the rights of the parties to this controversy turns is not the weight of the articles hauled but the price that Is received for it.
 Georgia Net Earnings Greater Th.u
 Alabama.
 In other words, it Is a ouestior ot revenue and not of tonnage unon which the case. that Is pending fin ths courts. turns-the question of rava. nue. Now let us see what is this rev. enue, for that is the whole question I have not the details forsthe last wear or two, but have the facts for five years. for the years ending June s0, 1900 to June 30. 1904, inclusive. cover I.r o IarRa mart of the time fir ..,t~soN