Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1916-02-10
COMMITTEE TILT
OVER bRANDE|S
Senate Investigators Take
Divergent Views Over
Hearing.
WITNESS ON STAND
FAVORS NOMINEE
James w. Carmalt, Chief Examiner Of
Interstate Commerce Commission,
Testifies in Behalf Of Man Appointed
to Supreme Beneh-DeeIares Bran
deis' Attitude Was Known by
Thorne and Others.

Carmalt chief examiner of the inter-
state commerce commission before the
senate sub committee investigating the
nomination Of Louis D. Brandeis to the
supreme court bench, today challenged
the declaration of Clifford Thorne.
sion. that Mr. Brandeis had concealed
from him the attitude he would take In
arguing the eastern freight rate case
before the commission. W.
Yesterday Mr.. Thorne, who was as
sociated with Mr.. Brandefs in the trial
of the rate case for shippers and the
commission, declared he was dumb
founded" when Brandels at the outset
of his closing argument conceded the
contention Of the railroads that exist
ing rate returns were inadequate for
the prosperity Of the roads and the
best interests of the public.
Denies concsaIment.
There is one incident firmly fixed
! in my mind," said Mr.. Carmalt re
garding conversation which Mr..
Thorne had with me on the second day
of the argument in the rate case. Mr..
Thorne, I understand, stated that when
the commission fixed the allotment 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 argu-
ment
Mr.. Thorne asked me what Mr..
Brandeis' position would be. There
was no doubt in my mind what Mr..
Brandeis position would be. had dis
, cussed it with him and he had told me.
i There certainly was no disposition
to conceal 1t from Mr.. Thorne. am
confident that told Mr. Thorne that
Mr.. Brandeis held that the net oper-
ating income of the carriers was not
adequate. with special stress on the
Central Freight Association territory.
Further said he would take tho posi-
tion that the methods pursued by tho
carriers to obtain a great revenue thru
a horizonal per cent increase were
not the proper ones.
Evidence Favors 8randeis. ~
7 am quite clear that it was the
result Of this compensation that Mr..
Thorne wrote Mr.. Brandeis note ask
ing change In the allotment of time.
It is very strongly my impression that
because Mr.. Thorne recognized the at
titude Mr.. Brandeis would take that
Mr.. Brandeis got the conception that
Mr.. Thorne wanted an opportunity to
answer him In addition to his main
argument In the case" 80
Mr.. Carmalt was called to the stand
on suggestion of George w. Anderson,
United States district attorney in
Boston, who is attending the hearings
His testimony was regarded by friends
Of Mr. Brandeis as being very much
In his favor.
Who Hired Brandeis.
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 il Brandeis helped Mr. Thorne
develop his side. Mr.. Carmalt re-
piled that he did and said that the
data collected from the railroads by
the commission under the general di-
rection of Mr.. Brandeis was available
to all
Senator Clark asked II Mr.. Brandeis
was not employed to develop the
"other side of the case" on the as
sumption that the railroads side would
be adequately cared for.
':He was not retained for the rail-
roads," responded Mr.. Carmalt. "He
was to develop the whole side"
cummins Gross Examines. ,&
Under cross examination by Senator
Cummins, Mr.. Carmalt testified Mr..
Brandeis did not merely state his view
that the net return of the railroads
was insufficient but he announced that
such would be his position In the argu-
ment of the case.
"Did MT. Brandeis discuss the pro-
priety OF his making this concession,
which was the vital point Of the case
made by Mr. Thorne?" asked Senator
Cummins.
mo, It did not occur to mo as being
improper"
Committee Disaarsss.
Mr. Carmalt's testimony then ended
and the sub-committee had an argu-
ment over the conduct Of the hearing.
This Investigation" said Senator
Walsh, "is for the purpose Of de-
veloplng facts to advise the committee
with respect to the fitness of this
nominee. Witnesses have been al
lowed to express in a general way
opinions formed of the nominee. I am
led to believe some Of the witnesses
know little Of the substantial facts but
have learned things thru the press or
from common rumor. I shall insist
that the witnesses being confined to
telling specific facts. l have in mind
C. w. Barron, of Boston, who was
called here because Of an editorial ON
this matter ss
Senator Clark protested. .This Is an
investigation and not trial. he said.
II shall hold that Witnesses SHAH not
be pre- judged before they take the
stand"
Senator Cummins took the same At