The evening world. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1887-1931, 1916-02-25

asked Mr.. Moss
II have no impression on the SUBJ
jeot," replied Mr.. Marshall. Tie added
that the general object Of the Ad-
miral, tho. Ryan and tho Hopper suits
was 20 determine once ana for all
whether or not the dual contracts
were constitutional
FOUGHT THE CASE TO THE
HIGHEST COURT.
IF they were constitutional" said
Mr.. Marshall, the work OF building
the new subways could go on. II not
constitutional some new way Of doing
tho work must be found"
Mr.. Marshall told how hard he had
worked in lighting the case all tho
way up TO and through the Court OF
Appeals. and declared that he had
brought In all cases that had any
bearing on the matter. lie submitted
a brief OF ninety pages.
Il was mover moro certain OF tho
soundness of the ground ] took" said
Mr.. Marshall. II would rather have
lost large sum OF money than lose
the case. ! thought was protecting
the cities of this State from the
establishment Of precedent which
might do them great harm"
Dad not the opinion OF Judge His
cock convince your asked Mr.. Moss.
NO." replied Mr.. Marshall. II have
the greatest respect for Judge His
Dock, but stili believe was right
and ~ there were n higher court "a
appeal 90 In the matter I would &c
up there In the belief that 1t would
agree with mo that the Court OF
Appeals was wrong.
Tho Admiral action was brough,
In good faith TO test the constitution
atty OF tho contracts as quickly as
possible" said Mr.. Marshall. Mr.
Coleman declared that IL any ma
terial facts were not brought forward
by the plaintiff he would sugges,
them himself In order that tho ques.
ton might be definitely settled. Mr.
Coleman told mo later that no had
called tho attention OF Clarence j
Shearn. counsel In the Hopper suit
to tho matter of q referendum, whIrl
had not included In my case"
Chief Counsel Coleman OF the Pub.
lie Service Commission stood I'D be.
side the witness chair and said over
Mr.. Marshalrs shoulder that he still
did not recall tho conversations men.
toned by Mr.. Marshall. though M
would not think OF contradicting him
He usually had kept memoranda oi
important conferences and no had
none OF these.
"Ysu regard this Admiral Reait,
case a. important, do you not? asi<ct
senator Thompson. mo. not especial
ly." replied Mr.. Coleman. What wa
important was tho manner in which /
went through" ....
But wasn't this the biggest ant
most important case you ever hat
anything to do within"
oh. financially, yes" replied MIR
Coleman aniiably.
y 81 WISH" said Senator Thompson
solemnly." that you would go to-day
at once, to the Chairman of tho Pub
lie Service Commission and tell hin
you have no recollection OF these i'm
portant conferences in which thi,
case was discussed. concerning which
witnesses here have testified here un'
der oath"
~ WILL" replied Mr.. Coleman. bow.
ing and looking embarrassed.
Senator Thompson asked Counsel j
Frank Smith 10 have transcript o.
the testimony affecting this question
delivered to the Chairman OF the pub
lie Service Commission.
Mr. Marshall said he had no tall
with Mr.. Nicoll or any one else con
nected with the Interborough regard
ing the Admiral Realty case.
GOT PAID THROUGH oTHEI
LAWYERS.
.. Did you know that Hays
Hershfield q Wolf sent a bill to tn
Interborough Company for your ser
vices In this case as we'll as thei
\ owna A. l did not. ] knew that OIL
! ONCE got our pay through Hay,
! Hersfield a Wolf.
q. Through them--from whom? A
oh, ! mean from Hays, Hershfiel
4 Wolf.
@ Did Hays. HershaeId q Wolf te
you who the real client was In thi
case? A. The matter was not dis
\ cussed. ! was interested in the con
stitutional question involved. Eel
! that ] was doing a public service.
have carried other cases oven as IA
as the United States Supreme Cour
as y matter OF duty. There was tn
case OF Leo J. Frank
"Oh. l know" interrupted Senate
4 Thompson, but when YOU were Gale
down from tho Adirondacks you wer
sure you would be paid for your wor
In this case. weren't your"
oh, yes" replied Mr.. Marshall.
Mr.. Moss asked Mr.. Marshall |
the clause in the dual contracts pro
vidtng that payment for damage
shall be taken out OF receipts befor
the city could get any profits ha
attracted his attention in conductin.
the Admiral Realty case. He did no
seem TO think much OF n.
y. Did you argue that If Their
were any accidents to passengers 4
operating the new subway the eS
pense or settlement would have TO b
paid as operating expenses" befor
the city could get any profits? A
| think that would be negligible II
view of the importance OF other ele
ments in the contracts. remembe
arguing that tho position of the com
panies toward the city In these con
tracts was Heads I win; tails yo
lose" have argued all these point,
But I think the cost OF accidents 4
i small compared with the millibns n