The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1942-02-13
State Board
CONTINUED from Page one)


but no practical good would have
come therefrom. l am satisfied that
any competent and unbiased jury of
lawyers would hold that the board of
railroad commissioners followed the
correct procedure in order to accom-
plish it's objective, to-wit: the speedy
restoration of the trains AT any rate
the results speak for themselves. 1t
surely is futile to debate about some
thing that has been demonstrated.
You say that the Attorney General
questioned the propriety of the COM
mission setting any hearing on the
question of abandonment of train
service without petition having been
filed by the railway company. If the
board deems it to be for the best in
terests of the state of Montana, and
it must be remembered that the board
represents all the people and not
particular faction or interest, it may
on it's own initiative set such a hear
| ing. The board is not obliged to sit
| by helplessly unable to act. 1t may
on its own initiative determine wheth-
er train service is or is not needed
AS matter of fact, the board set a
hearing on the question of "perma-
nent restoration of the trains" the
trains being then off. The hearing
was given wide publicity by publica-
ton of the boards order In the Red
Lodge and Billings papers. The Red
Lodge paper carried a front page APP
peal to the people to attend and testi-
fly at the hearing. The railway COM
pany was permitted to file an appli-
cation for discontinuance on the stip-
ulation that it would assume the bur-
den of proof, that is, show that the
trains were not necessary. Moreover,
in doing so the railway company rec
ognized the principle for which the
board contended to-wit: that the
the discontinuance of train service.
AT the hearing at Red Lodge on
October 8, 1941, Mr.. Phil Greenan rep
resented the Railroad Brotherhoods, |
assisted by Mr.. r. G.. Lots. Mr. John
Skinner represented the Chamber of
Commerce, the city of Red Lodge and
others. The hearing was conducted |
in the same manner as any hearing
on application of railroad company
for discontinuance of trains. Neither
of these gentlemen, or anyone else,
was confused" because the board
acted on its own initiative. No one
claimed to be confused" No one
made any protest on this ground The
record of the hearing contains not
single suggestion of confusion"
The hearing was given the usual
10 days notice. Neither of these gen
tlemen claimed that they did not have
ample time. Neither stated that there
were other witnesses that could be
procured or who wished to testify at |
the hearing. The record speaks for |
itself. The board sat and heard every |
witness who wished to testify and |
when all had testified the case was |
closed. Before the close the chair
man asked Mr.. Greenan how many
witnesses he had. The latter replied, |
Three" The chairman then said, |
"All right we will go right on and |
close it up" Mr.. Greenan answered, |
"OK."
The first time l heard that there
might be other witnesses who wished
to testify at the hearing in federal
court at Great Falls was the day be-
fore the hearing when l talked to Mr..
Skinner, although l had discussed
with the Attorney General the posi-
bility of getting other witnesses to
supplement those who testified at Red
Lodge, their testimony being con-
tanned in the transcript of that hear
ing. Mr.. Skinner and | agreed that
it should not be necessary for these
witnesses to again testify at Great
Falls, at considerable expense, since
their testimony had already been TAX
en- and could be considered by the
court. l advised the Attorney Gen
eral that if the court would not ac-
cept the transcript" we should re-
fuse to consent that the hearing at
Great Falls be a final hearing, but
solely on the courts order to show
cause.
Just how the prompt decision of the
board after the hearing, refusing the
application of the railway company
to discontinue the trains helped the
railway company to make a good
showing to procure an injunction is
lot clear. One would think that
delayed decision by the board would
De much more helpful to the railway |
company as it would give it more
ime. Neither the procedure by the !
BOARD in restoring the trains nor the :
prompt action of the board denying
he discontinuance of the trains can
,e considered as any advantage to
he railway company.
There are some phases of the case !;
t is not proper to discuss because
has been submitted to the federal
curt. 1t should be understood how
ver that although the railway COM
any, by putting up bond, obtained
discontinuance of the train until
he hparinp Of Graot Eo1lo ~, NToro,,, III