The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1911-02-02
OPINIONS DIFFER
ON DOCKS VALUE
Witnesses Heard on Both Sides
at Yesterdays Hearing
Oh Petition.
TRIES TO GET DISMISSAL
Attorney Taylor Produces Deed.
Interesting Testimony
IS in Sight.
Tries TO GET DISMISSAL

SLOW progrcss was made yesterday
In the hearing before the State Corpo-
ration Commission of the petition Of
| the bondholders Of the William r.
Trigg Company TO be allowed to close
and discontinue the Richmond dock.
Only two or three witnesses were cx-
amined
! No afternoon \session was had ad-
Journment being granted at | O'clock
/ AT az inc request of Judge George L.
CSnristian. counsel for the Chamber OF
..o.nmerce who desired time to con-
Yer with his associates and witnesses
Upon objection from r. T.. Byrd. an
attorney for the bondholders, who de-
5 3 TO leave Richmond this evening,
sioiiity Of conclusion being reached
today In any case The presumption
H. H. =! theretore, that at tho clcsc Of to-
had TO some day next week.
~ Public Much Interested.
nc SrcateSt possible interest Is
;ne'n ,.j manifested in this matter. which
lance to the PEOPLE of Richmond Fol-
loving the publication In The Times
t,pspatGh Yesterday Of the evidence OF
! ,m1 ,r, mp the case for the bond
holders for contingent fee. the Cor
poratson Compassion court room was
we'll filed with visitors The Mayor
men. and members Of tho Logjslat,,rn
summoned In regard to the passage OF
ms, ,no pi,i under which the hearing Is
icing held. were OH hand
II appeared from the testimony ~
Nr; BradleN on Tuesday that the bond
holders had nothing to do with the e.
rs the contract between the parties
was not maGc until after the General
Assembly. adjourned some Interest,"
ing details regarding this are cx-
pccted
Evidence for the petitioners was con
STUDDED and John c, Freeman. for the
Gha mper OF Commerce. was nut or the
| examination was finished when the al
1ournment came. and his cross cXami-
nation viii nc begun when the com
morning.
Introduces Decd
an intorcstine feature OF tho pro-
1es WAS the effort OF Henry ray
proceedings. Reading from tho deed
Of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway.
ne former owner Of tho dock Mr. ray
lor said that Il feature Of that contract
kept in good condition ana in trim for
NSH tic 2sl;cd Colonel G. T. Il. Bur
gs,W,In who Was then on the stand II
this could be complied with II the dock
We're n!l"h up When objection was
made TO this question. Judge prcntis
remarkad that the answer WAS obvious.
nroper case 70 come before the com
mission under the act which provides
that noching In It shall Impair tho
obligation Of contract between pri-
directed tho haarlnc to proceed, the
commss!on evidently not desiring to
rule on the Point Mt that moment.
nIr. F",d Wifness Again
James n Royd concluded his testi-
sesIion IL ..lkel Of the achievements
Or Mi,liam r. Trieg in building ships
In Richmond.
colonsl Furswyn- an engineer, was
next on the stand. His history OF nav,sa-
tion and rs development made inter
old dock ard Its possibilities in those
days. It was originally the plan OF the
kichmond and .Nlieghany Railroad to
unite great system Of rail and wate,
iran portation. However. with the de-
yelopment OF shipping, said Colonel
Rurgwyn, the dock outlived its useful
ness
He expressed the opinion that even
| - the proposed inland waterway sys-
TEN Is completed. OF which he seemed
to nave DOUBTS, the Richmond dock
Ter in competition with larger and
letter equipped facilities lie spoke of
| lfcshets. when the dock had been COW
| cred with water and Judge Crump In
cross decentralization, asked him ii this
| would not apply to any building To-
| Gated on the ground
| W ailcf scout, Il ware hOuScman,I
! the last witness for the petitioners
! lie said there are really no locations
| lor warehouses now, with railroad ia
cilltles except in the northern part
| OF the city. lie thought the mainte-
nance OF the dock retar(lS the progress
! OF Richmond, and that it would be bet
| ter to I'll it UP and build business
| houses
The petitioners resting, Judge chris
tan introduced John G. Freeman. an
active figure in Chamber. Of Commerce
work and prominent in the National
! Rivers and Harbors Congress MI
treeman read many extracts from pub
! LEGATIONS, and gave Of his immense
| knoWlcdgc Of waterways projects, II,
| behalf of the maintenance OF public
docks. lie thinks the dock an import
ant factor in the commercial and in :
| dustrial life of Richmond The city. he
| said. owns only 700 feet front at the
proposed wharvcs and three schooners
| would fill 1T at one time, and II is
| therefore insufficient if the city's mer-
chant marine Is to grow
Mr. Freeman thought Congrcssmen
would be unfavorably impressed il
] Richmond were to allow tho dock to
be closed Judge Crump sought il
| questions to show that the bill in the
L:egislaturee was really. special legisla-
| ton, on the ground that there Is no
other private dock affected with pub
lie use in any city in the State. but
the witness was not informed on this