Omaha daily bee., 1908-12-15
HARTMAN NEED MOI ANSWER
United States Supreme Court Decides
Important Question.
COMMERCE COMMISSION IN ISSUE
Justice DaF, in DisseBtfnE, Holds
Construction of Law Takes
Away All Power Of In
vestiEntfon.

WASHINGTON. Dec 14.-1n an opinion
by Justice Holmes, the supreme court OF
the United States today held that z. II.
Hartman and Otto Kahn. the latter New
York banker. should not be required 20 an
Ewer the Interstate Commerce commiHsiDri's
questions concerning dealings In stocks BE-
tween the Uni1n Pacific ana other rlRds TO
which they refused to make response when
the subject WAS under investigation in New
York
ConstruinE the decision o. the court IN
dissenting opinion Jus ice Day expressed
the opinion that the construction given the
Interstate commerce law takes from II al
power Of investigation.
The case came to the supreme court Of
The United States on CROSS appeals by Har-
r-man and the government from the de-
Cisiun Of the circuit court Of the United
States for the southern district Of Nov
York. holding that Mr.. Hartman should be
compelled TO make response 10 most Of the
questions. II arose in connection with the
ORDER Of the commission on November 1b
1906. directing an inquiry into the comb ma
tiun Of the Union Pacific rOad with such
other lines as the Southern Pactfic, the
Santa Fe, the Northern Pacific. the Great
Northern, the Illinois Central. the Chicago
& Alton and the New York Central
Main Points in Unse
This order was very sweeping character
and intended to develop the facts regarding
the community Of interest between the
Union Pacific and other roads, the prsc-
tices and methods Of the roads the rates
received. etc. II was also hopeS that II
would bring out the facts regarding the
transfer OF other stocks in the Union Pa
cific
When Mr.. Hartman YVES put on the
stand ne declined in response TO q question
to say whether he had owned any of the
Chicago & Alton stock. which was pur-
chased by the Union Pacific and the prices
Of which had been fixed by himself;
whether q portion OF the stock OF the ILL.,
nois Central had been acquired by q pool
OF which ne WIS member with the view
OF selling Il II the Union Pacific: and
whether the Uniun Pnrific directors were
interested in the New York Central stock
which was acquired by the Union Pacific.
he Also declined to say how much nf the
stock Of the A1chisOn. Topeka & Santa Fe
was owned by the directors Of the Union
Pacific.
The circuit court directed Mr.. Hartman
TO reply 10 these questions and he responded
by appealing to the supreme court.
decision OF the court was based upon the
refusal Of the lower court 10 compel Nj
Hartman to answer q question TO
whether be had purchased stock IN the
Union Pacific in the intention OF an an
nounced dividend. There was also pro
ceeding against Otto IA. Kahn. a member
OF the New York banking firm OF Kuhn.
Loeb e. Co, who were the financial agents
OF the Union Pacific, similar TO thHt against
Hartman. Mr.. Kahn refused TO answer
questions covering the poinTs upon which
Mr. Hartman declined to enter.
Colorado FrHud Charges valid.
The supreme court Of the United States
today In the main, reversed the verdict Of
the United States district court for the
district OF Colorado discharged from
custody a number OF persons who were
arrested on the charge OF conBpirinnE to
defrHud the government by entering timber
and coal lands in Colorado contrary 10
law.
NEW YORK. Dec. 4-Mr. Hartman said
in reference 10 the decision OF the supreme
court al Washington today that ne had
always been confident Of such an outcome.
Personally. ne said. ne had never had any
objection 10 answering the questions asked
and would have been rather GLAD 10 have
done 50 II II had been proper: but his rela-
ZION 70 mis- corporations forbade disclosing
their condolences, except in q lawful way.