The Birmingham age-herald., 1914-03-31

l over the top after watering will hasten | the growth and increace the erispness anG delicacy of the flavor. 1 injunction, and he had indicated a pref I erence for the injunction under the facts ] presented. When the O'Neal-H 1 agreement was made three judges stood l between the people and an injunction and | they had decided in favor of the people, 1 When Governor Conner made his agree | ment every prospect was in favor of the l railroads. When the O'Neal-Henderson | agreement was made every prospect was
 in favor of the people, as evidenced by l the decisions in the Minnesota and Mis-
 souIi cases, and Governor O'Neal and Mr.
 Henderson and the railroads knew it.
 Ignorance Is Deplorable Governor O'Neal says The great
 and primary question in the rate litigation
 was whether the state had the power u
 control and regulate railroad corporations
 operating in tn estate The ignorance ] of the governor in this respect is deplor- 1 able. It well illustrates how little knoWl 1 edge he had of the facts necessary to be l considered in order to intelligently decide 1 upon the terms of a compromise of the i litigation. The United States supreme
 court has been declaring for 10 years thar
 
 cared in every case that has come be- 1 fore it and has never waVered a hairs 1 breadth from this doctrine, and the ques- l tion mas never been seriously raised or l argued in the Alabama cases especially l since the circuit court of appeals in lgUg declared in these very cases that the state l lad such power
 l "Governor ONea1 also says. Through
 thls agreement the right of the
 railroad commission. without interference 1 from the federal courts. to fix railroad i freight rates ds) sustained. This is worse 1 than ignorance. It borders on imbecility. l l cannot understand how the railroad at torneys succeeded in so hypnotizing the | governor and the president of the railroad commission as to lead them to believe 1 that when the railroad commission makes an order fixing the freight rates the rail- l roads will be compelled to acquiesce in ! the order and cannot appeal to the fed l efel courts for redress if it does not
 suit them. Certainly there is nothing in l tfe agreement that deprves the rail- I roads of the right to appeal to the fed eral courts for redress from any order
 of the railroad commission if it does not 1 suit them, just they appealed to such 1 courts from the order fixing the 21a-cent l rate
 Again. Governor O'Neal says Through this agreement the jus
 tice of the passenger fare ds) agreed upon If this is true why did Governor t'Neal consent to the fourth paragraph
 of the agreement, which reads: 1 = Fourth: It is further understood and 1 agreed that nothing in this agreement 1 shall be construed as the final results of l, litigation as a voluntary concession i on the part of the rail companies or as I determination of any kind that the I standard passenger rates fixed by the I commission as aforesaid are just and l easonable rates for the service per 1 formed
 Asks Series of Questions 1 Now. if Governor O'Neal or MT. Hen 1 derson wishes to be frank with the peo- l | rle of Alabama, whose servants they are and to whom they are accountable for ! their stewardship with respect to this | rate settlement; if they wish to enlight- l en the people. whose sunfrages they are 1 going up and down the state begging ! fer, let them answer the following ques-
 tions fully, frankly and without eva | sion:
 q. How long before February 21, the cate when the agreement was signed had l negotiations for settlement of the rate cares been pending?
 Q Who first approached you. or either or Nou with a proposition for a settle- ment, and who represented the railroads
 in the preliminary negotiations?
 3. Did not such person advise you. or
 either of you, not to call the state s
 counsel into the negotiations, into q | conference?
 'i. Did not such person intimate e
 you, or either of you. directly in
 directly. the effect on the political fo--
 tunes of certain candidates for gover.
 nor. or other office, that would result
 from the settlement of the cases?
 D. What attorney with knowledge oi the facts did you consult prior to Feb ruary 2l, as to the advisa bility of mak- ing the settlement before you agreed or the terms of the settlement and re- duced the same to writing? Did you consult any attorney?
 70. Who prepared the agreement of set
 clement?
 Y. Did not the railroad attorneys ap- rear at the capitol with the agreement
 of settlement substantially as signed already prepared?
 ''S. Did you consult the attorney gen. cral as to the advisability of making the settlement on the terms agreed upon or only as to the sufficiency of the agree ment to express those terms? If so, how long before February 21?
 '9. Is it not a fact that the attorney general was not informed by either o ,cu that settlement was being con teinplated until February 21, the day tn, agreement was signed?
 TO Is it not fact that the attorney general was not told by you. or either
 of you. anything about the settlement until the railroad attcsneys appeared a the capitol on February 21? Il. Did You, or either of you. instruc the attorney general to call me up or ! the phone, or did he do that without instructions from you?
 .12. Did you, either of you, mak, any effort before signing the agreemen to obtain the advice opinion of eithe | of the states counsel as to the advsa biity of making the settlement, or al to the terms on which the settlemen should be made?
 13. In 1912. when you thought the Cen I tral of Georgia and the Western of Ala bama were going to propose settlement did you not have both of the state counsel to go to Montgomery for tn I conference? Why was not the sam course pursued this time? Was the req sen for not doing so to pe found in th pending campaign for governor and il the fact that it was desired to give basis for the claim to be made by Mr , Henderson that he by his diplomacy,