The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1915-10-01

letters. but they had been ordered out
with the statement that they must say
by whom they were employed.
MT. We'll said he instructed them 10
tel who their employer was, and they
were then told they could only see
such files as the Manufacturers Light
a Heat company might be interested
IN regarding the workmen's compensa.
tlon. This he said had been done I'M
Ger advice OF the attorney general and
Mr.. Lilly replied that while ..e did moi
know about il he would not dlsclaim
II.
This brought out the question of
demand made by Mr.. We'll last
spring for spondence between
Governor Hatfield and the commission
and copy OF the demand was read
, 10 the court. II was recalled that Ger.
tam letters had been produced but
. Mr.. We'll insisted there were Others
and he had taken this means of Sc
curing them.
b. NJ. Amber and George f. Price.
OF counsel for the company. took mart
In the argument which ended when
Judge Holt declared he did not believe
mere would be any difficulty in getting
any letters which might throw light
on the matter.
Snyder then continued his testimony
regarding letters the governor had
sent TO the commission. one he de
CARED saying certain claim ought to
De paid. Three or four letters. he said
declared the governor thought certain
claims ought to be paid. Once. he
said. OFT told him the governor had
oyerruled a case the commission had
decided
Snyder Laid OF.
Judge Holt conducted the cross ex.
s sn,.1 which brought out that
| snyder had been laid on" when the
commission was rcorganiEed and had
quit his position. He was ouegfioned
closely as 10 the conversation OFT had
Win the governor Office over the EN-
pioy ment OF Hicks. and said finally he
ola not know what the conversation
was as he was not on the telepbone
Judge Holt also asked about the LET
ters ne had referred 20 and he said
one vas on whether the commission
should act on the case of n check.
weighman who was employed nv the
coal company and the miners An
other case he said. had 10 do with
man who had his Lex cut on
Judge Holt here Addressed tho
contents Of the letters a. testifod 40
De rejected. as they did moi show
coercion OF the commission by the GOV.
Mr. Vandervort ruled "a followa.
The mere fact that notice No.,
Dtth even 10 produce letters. does MOI
necessarily mean that these Ieffers
Mvglu De competent evidence when In.
uoduced consequently if the evidence
oueltu verbally does not show tho III.
teIleIence by the governor on control
~ tnt governor. that tostfmonv
pepper would bt proper Sol think ae
% inese two letters. that 1 rilf no,r
vplecuon having been FIRST made and
could not tell what would h. fr9fi
n.d 70 that the contents of fhoae tu.o
tttefs 20 fer as given by the witness
suoulu DC rejected. ! can't SOC nov,
luat would show Interference bv fho
governor There is nothing inconrie.
ttht a. narrated by tho witness. aa 10
th0sc Two letters. with his rcsponei.
ulliN aa Eoycrnor of the state that
etn see and 7 take % that your ohfcc.
ION would cover that matter. and ID ia
onlN ialr 20 myself that when u have
'NNh'9 lnAl point that should rule
Demands CorrcaDondence
MI Wen then made a formal de-
mand on counsel for the commission
Tor an correspondence hefwoon Gov
tinor Hatfield and the commission al
vel a. members of tho commiasion I'M
which his views were Expressed on
,ases peudinF. cases which bad been
utciueq and cases on which they mirhf
act Also All letters addressed hy tho
EuNtIhof OFFICIALLY or personally fo
intmners % the commission on nlc in
luf Nofkmpn compensation depart.
ment or which ought Co BE- ON fila
mere This general notice was given.
n' talu because We have NOT been
permitted to make examination Of
these records