Arizona republican., 1917-01-31
0N
 STAND BUT HAS
 LII T[E TO SAY

Testifying to the effect that he was willing to build the branch line >sked by his company, but that he wanted the Ray and ~Gila Valley railroad com pany to operate it, and that he would not operate the line himself if he coJld possibly get out of 1t. Frank c. Armstrong, president Of the Arizona Hercules Copper company. took the stand yesterday afternoon in the hearing being held before the corpor. alton commission. Although Arm strong is the man behind the com plaint, he Was called as q witness by the defense.
 In answering complicated questions thrust at him by Attorney Chalmers for the defense, Mir. Armstrong pre- ed that he could talk a great deal and give little information One of the first questions asked the president of the Arizona Hercules was why his company did not build the line and operate it itself.
 "lt wouldn't be nusinesslike.' was Mir ArmstIong's reply.
 Why wouldn't il be nusinesslike |" queried MT Chalmers
 Because the railroad has obliqa . tions to the public" replied Mr. Arm strong, "and we intend to take ad- vantage of those obligations 4 rail- road can supply better service than people not in the railroad business"
 Suppose the road builds the sput rou ask for and then your mine closes down. was then asked of AIr Arm strong
 MT. Armstrong's reply to this rather leading question was in substance that no one would lose money in the building of the spur He then went q ia the fa and Glla Valley to build the road under his direction. but in co operation with him. and that he cy- poets to. be paid for the road by means Of rebates to be paid the mining com pdny
 Counsel for the defense then asked nm If he was familiar with the fed eral law regarding rebates. 10 which he replied that ne was not.
 During his testimony. Mir. Arm strong explained that he was not al all familiar with the operating meth ods of railroads. and that he could not get good men to run two miles of tracH for him. Leading back to the first question which was asked the president of the mining company ttat ,s, why he did not build the road and let the Pay and Gila Valley oD- crate II for him. Mir. Chalmers put Inc same question only in different language
 As soon IS the question was asked Mi Armstrong looked slightly puz zled glanced at his attorneys as ir he expected them to object and then corNulsed the audience as well as tn, commission hv replying "I had pretty good answer to that nuestior before. eut ! have forgotten it. He then asked tie court reporter to turn back and read his former answer which the rororter did much to MT Armstrong s satisfaction and to fhe 2nlzcment of his attorneys.
 T. D. Cashtll rate expert for the corporation commission. was on the stand the major portion of the day lie was called to testify to the earn in2s Of the Ray and Gila Valley. tha lates charged. md to give expert opihion on various phaseSsof the pro posed side lire to the Arizona Her cules mine and mill
 NIT Cashell produced figures which showed that the Ray and Gila Valley had earned in 1916 S546.4720S and mad cXperded S20A. .167.4j. leaving net arnine of S2t5.,04.65. or l71a per cent on the investment. He inform ed AIr. Chalmers that he considered that very fair return on the invest mont, but Inc attorney called his at tention 70 the fact that the road had declared nc dividends during the year. and asked Mir. Cashell if he could ex- plain why none had been declared Mt. Casheli. stated that he knew no reason why they should not have been dcelal ed.
 Mir. Cashell had also figured out rates which would have 10 be put in effect in oase the proposed spur is built between Ray Junction and the mine and the junction and the mill. introducing them as evidence in the case.
 II was expected that the case would De closed last evening, but it was an- nounced just before ! o'clock. that it would probably run through most of today