Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-07-16

support-the railroad side Of the argument
OF the states side.
He said that the case has not been de-
cided The state has neither lost ii nor
won IT. 1t is still pending.
MLENDoN ASKS QUESTIONS.
Mr.. McLendon took up the questioning
of Judge Hart.
IT believe you state that I am the only
member of the commission who furnished
YOU any facts whatever
Yes. except the argument that Judge
Hillyei furnished me-"
And as a matter of fact that argument
was of no service to your
81 wouldn't say that.
Mr.. McLendon's questions led into the
details of the Morgan case and the case
argued before Judge Speer at Mt. Airy,
and the railroad rates and reductions and
classes involved in each.
Judge Hart, called upon to confirm
some of the abstract figures quoted by
Mr.. McLendon. declined to commit him
self in any case.
mo. no sirr' he finally said. L can
carry those things in my mind
Asked how he looked upon the state
ment furnished by Mr.. McLendon, he re-
piled: -,,..,.,,
"I understood II to be a compilation
NJ statistics involving cost of transpor-
tetion cost of maintenance. and soforth'
I thought II was a matter in which you
had taken a very wide range.
Didn't you understand 1t to be state
ment of all the facts touching upon IN
freight situation in this territory such
e a. mas abIe to gather?" asked Mr..
McLendon. ,... IA
"As a matter of fact, did anybody aoo
any facts to those set forth In my STATE
ment?" asked Mr.. McLendon.
con. YES. SIR" responded Judge Hart
with warmth. cit would make many
times the volume of the evidence that
| there is there" A..
strength of the states case after reaoins
vour statement there" replied Judge
| Hart to another question by Mr.. McLen-
| don. ,,-
GAS a matter of fact, you didn't think
| the state had a very strong casen oe-
manded Mr.. McLendon.
''Why. no." returned Judge Hart, VINO
had repeatedly stated that he had re-
ceived no other facts than those furnlsn-
ed by Mr.. McLendon.
don't know how proper It is for me
as states attorney to criticise the state
case" he added, turning to the commit
| tee. ct don't want to be put in that at
| titude. The case is not yet decided"
| whatever opinion you formed or the
states case was based upon the facts SUB
mitted to you by Mr.. McLendonh" asked
Mr.. Hardman, Mr.. McLendon concluding.
Yes, and upon the testimony of wit
nesses in the court room, replied Judge
Hart who was then excused.
Judge Hines. attorney for the state rail-
road commission, was called to the stand.
"Mr. McLendon voted against the prop
/ osition to oppose the reduction In rates, "
| replied Judge Hines to a question.
| I'm response TO written requests that l
| addressed to each member of the COM
mission, asking for facts to assist me in
/ fighting the states case, Judge Hillyer
| sent me a letter, Mr.. Galloway furnish
| ed me a short memorandum, and Mr..
McLendon furnished me the statement
| that you have already in evidence.
'.Mr McLendon, whenever 1 asked him
for any facts, referred me to the secre-
\ tary of the commission. I thought he
was in favor of sustaining his minority
view that the state ought not to push
the case.
| 1.-The statement of Mr.. McLendon pre-
| scented the side of the railroads." replied
| Judge Hines to other questions. II did
not think we could base the states COM
plant upon the facts stated in that com
munication. I relied upon facts outside
of those SCI forth in the communication"
Mr.. Wright asked:
! did Mr.. McLendon apparently sink his
private and official views after the com
mission overruled them?'' .. 49,
Judge Hines: "I don't know how to an
| swer that question. He remarked to me
| a number of times. as 1 recall it, that we
would not succeed in that litigation.
IT think the information in his state
ment was correct, considering the sources
from which 1t eame. j think ] have rea.