The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-02-10
DEFENDS BRANDEIS
Continued from Page oue.J


would be. I had discussed it with
him and he had told me. There GER
tainly was no disposition to conceal it
from Mr.. Thorne. 1 am confident that
1 told Mr.. Thorne that Mr.. Brandeis
would take the position that the net
operating income of the carriers was
not adequate. with special stress on
the central freight association terri
tory Further. 1 said he would take
the position that the methods pursued
by the carriers to obtain greater
revenues through a horizontal five per
cent increase was not the proper
method of increasing their revenues
Brandeis's Friends Pleased.
81 am quite certain that it was as
the result of this conversation that Mr..
Thorne wrote Mr.. Brandeis a note ask
ing about change in the allotment of
time. 1t is very strongly my impress
sion that because Mr.. Thorne recog-
nized the attitude Mr.. Brandeis would
take. that. Mr.. Brandeis got the con-
ception that Mr.. Thorne wanted an
opportunity to answer him in addition
to his main argument in the case. 8
Mr.. Carmalt was oaI1ed to the stand
on suggestion of Geo4 ge w. Anderson,
United States district attorney in Bos-
ton, who is attending the hearings
His testimony was regarded by friends
hof Mr.. Brandeis as being very much in
his favor.
Position Not Improper.
Chairman Chiffon stated that his
understanding was that Mr.. Brandeis
was employed to assist in developing
+'all sides of the case" and asked Car
malt if Brandeis helped Thorne de
velop his side. Carmalt replied that
he did, and said that the data COLI
lected from the railroads by the COM
mission under the general direction of
Mr.. Brandeis were available to al.
Senator Clarke asked if Mr.. Brandeis
he h
err side of the case" on the assump-
ton that the railroads side would be
adequately cared for.
He was not retained for the rail-
road" responded Carmalt. He was
to develop the whole case"
Did Mr.. Brandeis discuss the pro-
priety of his making this concession
which was the vital point of the case
made up by Mr.. Thorne?" asked Sen
ator Cummins.
mo. it did not occur to me as being
improper
CarmaIt's testimony then ended and
the subcommittee had an argument
over the conduct of the hearing.
Investigators Clash.
This investigation said Senator
Walsh, lis for the purpose of develop
ing facts to advise the committee with
respect to the fitness of this nominee.
Witnesses have been allowed to eX-
formed concerning the nominee. I am
led to believe that some of the wit
nesses summoned know little about
substantial facts but have only learned
things through the press or from COM
mon rumor. 1 shall insist that witness
be confined hereafter to telling spe-
cific facts affecting the propriety of
confirmation of this nominee.
81 have in mind c. w. Barron of
Boston, who was called here because
of an editorial on this matter. I as
sumo that he may have little direct
knowledge. If he has, 1 will be glad
to hear him.
Senator Clarke protested This is
an investigation and not a trial." said
he. 81 shall hold that witnesses shall
not be prejudged before they take the
stand" Senator Cummins took the
same attitude
Railroad Attorney Witness.
Frank Lyon, attorney for the COM
mission in the 1910 rate case and at
torney for the Pittsburg Coal com
pany, at the 1913 case testified that
in the latter case he considered Mr.
Brandeis's duties the same as those he
(LyOn) performed in 1910 and he had
regarded himself as bound to bring to
the attention of the commission anv
facts favorable to the railroads as well
as to the shippers.
MeIIen SubpOenaed.
After an exciting four hour session,
the senate Subcommittee investigating
the fitness of Louis Brandeis for the
supreme bench, today decided to sub
poena Charles S. Mellen of the New
Haven railway as witness and adj
journed until next Tuesday.