The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-10-21

4ONMtN0ME0 AN0MA Aa&G 0.@~sy There may be something after tomor- row. but you will have to wat uhti after tomorrow"
 President Smith, in his room at the Exchange. where he met District At torney George W. Jones and Assistant District Attorney J. Manly s.es' s,s- us- cuss the situation. He said that ne had nothing for publication beyond his reply tosthe Governors interview, pub- lished yesterday morning.
 The Governor's Interview.
 Considerable comment was heard yesterday over the article wnich ap- peared in yesterday mornings Atlanta T,onstftution. The interview. between four and five columns in length. was written by John Corrigan, Jr. Wash fngton Correspondent of The Constitu- tion. who was in Montgomery a few dags ago. It was not published In any Alabama newspaper.
 Tn the course of the interview as in preceding public utterances of the Chief Executive. he made much of the low rates that exist in Georgia. and President Smith, in his reply, calls att tention to the fact that those reduced rates have had the effect of stopping railroad building in the Empire State. and have bankrupted several of the fallfDauS dlESd0y OpCtatih5 sHSASs @AS fact that Georgia conditions are not The same as those in Alabama Is also brought out.
 Tn his letter of reply to the Cover nor, President Smith says:
 Montgomery. Ala, Oct. 20, 1907. "Editor The Advertiser:
 aThe Atlanta Constitution of this date publishes an interview with Hon. B. B. Conner, Governor of Alabama, commenting upon the contention be- tween the State and corporations op- erating railroads in the State, growth g ont of the enactment of restrictive Legislation during the last session of the Legislature, which contains num- erous erroneous statements, few of which wish to correct:
 He states that the railroads In Geor- gia have put in effect. pending litiga- ton, a lower passenger rate than that fixed by the statutes Of Alabama. He fails to state that the railroads en- deayored to secure a restraining or- der pending their application Tor an interiocutory inJunction preventing the enforcement of rates penaihg tne result of the litigation. and that the application for an intNriocutory injune- ton is now being considered by the
 sTye also asserts that the railroads of Georgia have for years maintained without protest, on the no articles and practically all other classes or proper ty, d much lower rate than prevails ln Aiahama. The statement that cnese ratss were adopted without protest Is
 s-rha State of Georgia was the first ar one of the first, in the Union to en- aot a law creating a Railroad Commis- sion with mandatory powers. IL true that the Commission promulgated rates for the transportation or proper tv materially less than had been Tn CT fs.t nrior thereto, but the railroads without exception protested. and some of them litigated
 stops Railroad Building.
 sTf am not mistaken. only one im- nortant line in the State of Georgia has been constructed since the enact ment of the Legislation, and there IS rood reason for believing that those who furnished the capital to construct that line have not received an ade- nuafa return upon their investment. lli other roads constructed since the enactment of the injurious Legislation have been built largely by local capi- fal. and such local roads. built for the accommodation of the communities di- rectly affected. have In some instances been consolidated into lines that prom ssa to be important. Some have been acquired by the older corporations, q large part of the original capital in vested having been lost.
 'It is tTne that the benefits of rail transportation lines to communities and through territory not adequately SUD- piled with such facilities. Is of such advantage that those deriving the ben' efits can afford to invest considerable amounts which may at the time moi promise to be directly remunerative, re- lying upon the advantages accruing tt them for their recompense.
 'Ts 1t desirable for the State of Geor gia, or any other State, to enact leg isiation that prevents the investment O canital of citizens of other States ant countries and forces the citizens O each State to provide the capital fo additional transportation facilities with the almost certainty that mucl the larger portion or the amount in vested will be lost?
 sT believe the State of Alabama ma! expect a repetition of the experience of the State of Georgia: that the leg isiation alread yenacted and the at kitude- of the Chief Executive and tn Legislature must necessarily proven