Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-06-03
Elton Says New Haven d.
rect0rs Did Not Wish to
Run Counter.
PERSONALLY OPPOSED
SOME "EXTRAVAGANCES"
Explains Purchase of Various Prop
erties-sheds Light on Financier's
Absolute Control.

state commerce commission today in It's
inquiry into the systems financial opera
tons that the acquisition of the West
chester and the several trolley properties
in consonance with a broad policy
which had for its end the Improvement
of terminal facilities in New York city
and a comprehensive increase of the
transportation facilities of the system
Thes. points We're developed on questions
BY William Nelson Cromwell, representing
several of the directors.
Mr.. Elton had testified under questions
by Chief Counsel Folk that he did not
approve personally of what he termed
.'extravagances'' in the purchase by the
New Haven of some Of its subsidiaries.
He said the board largely depended upon
the Judgment Of the executive commit
tee composed of the late ]. Pierpont
Morgan. William Rockefeller and Director
Brush.
Followed Mr.. Morgan.
I'VE did not like to run counter to Mr..
Morgan said Mr.. Elton. and he added
that his Discrimination probably was due
To "timidty."
Sometimes the witness said he had
sought Information TO some of the
deals approved by the board, but thought
perhaps he was Il bit too thick-headed'
to understand just what the various sit
uations We're.
William Skinner and other directors and
Lawrence Minot a member of the board
during part of the time Charles s.
MelIen was president, also were ready to
testify.
Mr.. Elton said he was present at the
meeting at which Messrs. Morgan, Rock
efeller and Miller We're appointed COM
mittee in the New York Westchester and
Boston transaction and also when they
reported
What was your opinion of their advo-
eating spending over S11,00Jo0o for the
road" asked Mr.. Folk.
II would not say that I felt it was
unnecessary but that it was extrava-
gance.
Were you surprised"
Il think l was but ! had absolute
confidence in Messrs. Morgan, Rookie
Teller and Miller.
Mellen Dominating Figure.
"Who was the domino ting inquire at
the board meetings."
Il think Mr.. Mellen was
did not the board usually acquiesce
in the recommendations made by j.
Pierpont Morgan?'
Yes. 1 think it did" Mr.. Elton said
he remembered no definite instance
where the wishes of Mr.. Morgan were
opposed.
any objections made by the directors
against some of his wishes?'
"Om. among themselves they would
probab bly, object"
Did Mr.. Morgan make any statement
Of value of securities acquired for the
11.000,0O0?'
Not that / remember"
Mr. Elton said he did not recall any
thing about the 5000 shares of stock of
the New Haven turned over to Mr.. Mel
len with which to acquire $4,000 shares
of Westminster stock, as testified by
Mr.. Mellen. He said he knew nothing
of the transactions with Police In
spector Byrnes except as he had read
the testimony of Mr.. Mellen.
Mr.. Elton said he was a director also of
the New England Navigation Company.
Asked if he could tell the difference be-
tween a meeting of one board and a
meeting of the other, he replied:
We'll. the same men were on both
boards. One was called the New Haven
meeting and the other the Navigation
Company. We just passed from one to
Mr.. Elton said he did not know the
subsidiaries of the New Haven num-
bered as6, and added that when he
sought information as to the operations
OF those companies and other matters
in connection with them he did not
meet with much success.
He explained that in most of the
transactions discussed at board meet
ings reports were made by the execu-
tive committee, composed of Messrs.
Morgan, Rockefeller and Brush.
Billiard Transactions.
Questioned regarding the John L. Bill
lard Company's transactions, Mr.. Elton
said:
II never understood Billiard Company
matters
Asked as to the transaction involving
1Os,94s shares of Boston and Maine
stock. in which there was profit of
SITS, fCO. Mr.. Elton testified it was his
understanding at the time that the profit
belonged to the New Haven road. and
not to Billiard
Mr.. Folk read the minutes of a meeting
Of the directors October g. 1899 which
showed the New Haven was to get the
profit from the deal except reasonable
compensation to Mr.. Billiard for his serv-
ices. Mr.. Elton said he thought the min
utes were correct and that they expressed
his understanding of what took place.
what was your understanding as to
what Mr.. Billiard WIS to get out of the
transaction asked Mr.. Folk.
only that he was to have a reasonable
profit
Was there any discussion of the
amount of the profit by the board?"
That was left to the executive COM
mittee."
THE board then would leave such mat
tiers to the executive committee?"
Yes. practically"
Difference in Methods.
What is the difference between the
present conduct of affairs as compared
with the former method" asked
Solicitor Folk.
Well. the directors have learned a
great deal They are not taking one
mans word. Then the head of the road
is a very different man. Mr.. Mellens
ambition ran away with him.
Mr.. Elliott is a much more deliber-
ate man than Mr.. Mellen. He doesn't
go with such rush. He doesn't carry
members of the board off their feet"
Mr.. Elton believed that formerly the
directors depended too much on Nor
gan and Mellen. and added:
The directors now direct
After Mr.. Folk had concluded his in
quiries ]. H. W. Grim. counsel for Mr..
Mellen. asked a few questions.
William Nelson Cromwell, who appeared
as counsel for William Skinner and other
directors. also asked Mr.. Elton number
of questions tending TO show that the
acquisition of the New York, Westchester
and Boston railroad was, or would be- OF
great assistance to the New Haven in
the way of improving its terminal facli-
ties in New York Mr.. Elton said this
matter had been discussed for several
years by the New Haven board
An adjournment was taken until later
today.