The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-11-20
Objections to Testimony of Dr. Francis Walker
 Causes Break
LAY MATTER BEFORE
 THREE COURT JUDGES
Dr. Walker Testifies That Absence of F1uctuation of Prices in 1901- 1911 Indicates Lack of
 Competition

Washington. November 1a.-Dis- agreement today over the admissibility of testimony by pr. Francis walker. depaty commissioner of corporations, as to his opinion regarding the huc- ttatlon Of iron and steel product prices, brought the taking Of testimony before Examiner Henry P. Brown in the Init ed States Steel corporation dissolution suit to sudden temporary close
 Attorneys for the government and for the Steel corporation hastened to Philadelphia to lay the question before the three judges of the United States circuit court of appeals at Philadel- phia, who will sit. for the purpose Of hearing this case. tomorrow at 1o;so a. m, as the United States district court for New Jersey. The hearing probably will be resumed here Thurs day.
 Tables of Prices Shown
 pr. Walker early in the day offered In evidence tables of prices upon which the bureau of corporations based it's reports upon the Steel corporation. At torneys for the corporation. headed by R. " I.indabury and c. A. Severance, objected to them as hearsay. tho wit ness having testified that they were compiled from market prices printed In trade papers and nor from the books of the corporation to which tho bu- reau has access.
 The break between the attorneys came when pr. Walker began to tes- tlfy about charts, based upon the tables. Fluctuations in prices in the years from 1895 to 1901, the witness testified, showed the absence of an arr bitrary control of prices. He charac- terized periods of lack of fluctuation after the formation of the Steel cor poration from 1901 to 1911 as due to the absence of competitive conditions. as positive indication of non-com- patitiye control of.prices.3 The witness proceeded through chsess showing the prices of steel @liss beams. plates hars. shseys 5lud zfne s1ales. Ttp atss. corporation epsprnes punrtuatsd his testimony wltf repeated objections that 1t was open and argunentative testi- mons OH a non-expert matter. Further more. they complained Dr. Walker had not qualified as an expert on this par
  ticular matter.
 Several times the attorneys for the corporation Interrupted tho witness as they stood gazing over his shoulder. to ask that he be 'fair," and comment upon years that were favorable to their side,
 Dickinson Protests
 j. Nj Dick inson, special assistant to the Attorney General, protested against such comment upon the witness tes- timony and gave notice that he would bring it 10 the attention of the court tomorrow MT. Dickinson objected par ticularly to the statement of opposing counsel that Dr. Walker had been sent to the hearing by the department of justice to make an argument"
 This witness refused to testify un- til he was subpoenaed and directed by his superior, the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, 10 respond" declared Mir. Dickinson.
 Attorneys for the government ara anxious to have Dr. Walkers explan atory testimony admitted because II would serve to bring out in bold re- lief before the judges who pass upon the case what the government contends are the crucial facts of the mass of tables. which are difficult Of compre- hension by anyone except by expert statisticians The Steel corporation at torneys. on the other hand, insist that the opinions given are the very points which the courts must decide, namely. whether or not the organization of the Steel corporation has resulted in a control of prices.