Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1915-11-12
When Chief Executive Of Ma
ton, Colonel Is Declared to.
Have Opposed Sale ofShipS
TO Charles W, Morse,
SAID GOVERNMENT
WOULD NOT PROSECUTE
Qualified Statement, 1t Is Saidr
BY Declaring He Would
Promise No immunity If
Law Was Violated,

49,. .opa,a1 JouaNAL arectAL lsAsgp W1RHl
No,p York. Nov ll.-Former Presi-
den, Roosevelt was brought into the
testimony today at the trial of the
eleven former New york. New Haven
& Hartford directors, charged with
violating the Sherman law as having
Given assurance to Charles S. Mellen
,bat IN. New Haven need have no fear
of federal action during Roosevelts
administration if il rejected a propo-
sition to dispose of its steamship
properties to Charles w Morse
The testimony, which was given by
Mr. Mellen. was adduced by the gov
eminent to show that MIR. Mellen new
ertheless recommended the sale of
the properties ana that the New lla-
ven directors, in pursuance of their
alleged purpose to maintain a monop-
oly of the transportation traffic Of
New England. declined TO consider the
presidents recommendation.
\ Twice-told Tale.
While it was a twicetold tale, as
Mr.. Mellen gave similar testimony at
inquiry into New Haven affairs, Mr..
Mellen added to it today by saying
that Mr.. Roosevelt felt that it would
be- nimical TO public interest for
Morse to consummate his purpose of
getting control of the Atlantic coast
wise steamship lines through acquisi-
ton Of the New Haven properties, and
that Commissioners Knapp ana
Prouty and Herbert Knox Smith, com
missioner Of corporations, held the
same opinion. The government, how
ever, placed emphasis on the por-
ton of the witnesses testimony in
which he quoted Colonel Roosevelt
as saying
II am no lawyer and I can promise
you no immunity If you violate the
law
Profit Offered by Morse.
Morse i'm January. 1907. according
to Mellen, had offered to buy the New
Hayen's steamship lines for $4,000
GOO which would have been a profit
Of $l4O0O,O0O on their cost. Melen
thought the New Haven ought to take
advantage of the opportunity mas
much as the question was being agi-
taed in congress Of requiring railroad
lines to divorce themselves from own
ership Of steamship lines He said he
went to Washington and explained
the situation to the president in the
presence Of Messrs. Knapp. Prouty
and Smith
! was fearful" he said, that if
This legislation should be passed, it
might come at a time when there
would be no purchaser for the prop
erly and we would have them on our
hands"
And Messrs Knapp and Prouty
agreed with him - interposed r. v
Lndabury, Of the defense.
Presidents Promise, Conditioned.
Ihey did said the witness, add
ing that in his opinion, the assurance
gwen by the president was one reason
why the New Haven steamship lines
were not included in the bill in equity
brought against the New Haven in
i9O9 The government maintains.
however that the assurances given by
resident Roosevelt was meant to ap-
p'y solely to the proposed legislation
ana not to acts of the New Haven
''enaole to the Sherman law.
May I ask, interrupted De Laney
NlcoI of the defense. that when the
government again comes to amend
.ne bin Of particulars they make
theodore Roosevelt q co-copenira- -
tor?"
rms remark caused laughter in the
court room.
"r' Mellen did not today prove a
hostile witness in the opinion of the
government council. He denied thai
"mplance Of competition was kept
IT,, pp between the JOY line and the New
,'a.en after its acquisition. but he ad-
n"1'ed tnat the United States Trans
rol''tlon company, another New Ha-
v n concern, was used TO meet the
PRISE line's competition.
AN attempt by the government to
ano" that the United states company
'so , was secretly controlled. was ham
ory e''''' la''uro ol mem