The Brunswick news. [volume] (Brunswick, Ga.) 1906-2016, 1916-02-11
ADDITIONAL WITNESSES AP-
PEARED BEFORE COMMIT
TEE YESTERDAY.
NEVER CONCEALED ATTITUDE
Mr.. CarmaIt Challenges What a
Previous Witness Said of the
Rate Cases--His Position Was
Always Known.

WASHINGTON, Feb. 1O.-James
| W. Carmalt, chief examiner of the
interstate commerce commission, be.
! lore senate subcommittee investigat.
ing the nomination of Louis D. Bran.
deis to the supreme court bench, to.
day challenged the declaration of
fClifford Thorne, chairman of the
Iowa railroad commission, that Mr..
Brandeis had concealed from him the
attitude he would take in arguing the
eastern freight rate case before the
commission.
Yesterday Mr.. Thorne, who was as
sociated with Mr.. Brandeis in the
trial of the rate case for shippers
and the commission. declared he was
'dumbfounded" when Brandeis at the
outset of his closing argument con-
ceded the contention of the railroads
that existing rate returns were made
quate for the -prosperity- Of tIle-r reads
ana the best interests of the public.
There is one incident firmly fixed
in my mind" said Mr. Carmalt, gre.
garding conversation Mr.. Therne
had with me on the second day of
the argument in the rate case. Mr.
Ihorne, | understand, stated that
when the commission fixed the allot.
ment of time for attorneys to argue
the case, he had asked the privilege
of being permitted to follow counsel
for the shippers instead of opening
the argument
"Mr. Thorne asked me what Mr..
Brandeis' position would be in the ar
gument. There was no doubt in nv
mind what Mr. Brandeis' position
would be. | had discussed it with
him and he had told me. There Ger.
tainly was no disposition to conceal
it from Mr.. Thorne. | am confident
that l told Mr.. Thorne that Mr.. Bran
deis would take the position that the
net operating income of the carriers
was not adequate, with special stress
on the Central Freight association
territory. Further, | said, he would
take the position that the methods
pursued by the carriers to obtain
greater revenues through hor-
izontal five per cent increase was not
the proper method of increasing their
revenues.
Il am quite clear that it was as the
result of this conversation that Mr..
Thorne wrote Mr.. Brandeis a note
asking about change in the allot-
ment of time, 1t is very strongly my
| impression that because Mr. Thorne
recognized the attitude Mr.. Brandeis
would take that Mr.. Brandeis got the
conception that Mr.. Thorne wanted
an opportunity to answer him in adj
dition to his main argument in the
case"
Chairman Chiffon stated that his
understanding was that Mr.. Brandeis
was employed to assist in developing
"all sides of the case" and asked Mr..
Carmalt if Brandeis helped Thorne
develop his side. Carmalt replied
that he did
Senator Clark asked if Brandeis
was not employed to develop the
'other side Of the case" and the as
sumption that the railroads side
would be inadequately cared for.
"He was not retained for the rail
roads," responded Carmalt HE was
to develop the whole case"
Including the case for the rail,
roads" 4I,,.
81 think the commission assumed
the railroads case would be taken
care OF BY fheif attorneys" 2n6D
aHWere Mr., t8randeis' activities de-
voted to the side of railroads." per-
/ sisted the senator. ..antq .a,.
"The record, l think, shows that
they were employed to develop the
other side" (The shippers.)
when you told Mr. Thorne of the
conclusion Mr.. Brandeis had reach
ed" asked Senator Clark, "did he
express. surprise?"
Eyes, he did"
Carmalt said there was never, so
far as he knew, a conference sof at
torneys representing the shippers to
exchange views on preparation of
the argument.
How did Mr.. Brandeis come to
disclose to you what his conclusion
was as to adequacy of railroad rev.
enues?" Senator Walsh asked.
81 don't know except that we were
associated together in the office and