New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-02-21
VERY UISCELLANEOUS PROFITS.

The refusal of the Delaware and Hudson re-
port TO TIE TRIBUNE. il seems, was piece of
childish spitc-work. So a whipped schoolboy
makes faces behind his slate at the teacher
But the ill-temper of the officials does not
make it the less our duty to examine the re-
port with candor and fairness, as well as with
care On the whole it is at first sight good
looking report. 1t would show, if its
statements could all be accepted, that the
condition Of the company is not quite so bad
as there was reason to suppose. But we must
also remember that the year embraced includes
only three months of low prices for coal. The
combination was not broken and prices did
not fall until September, and the report covers
nine months of monopoly prices, against only
three months Of free competition.
We notice, therefore, with some surprise
that the value of coal sold during 1876 was
only $G,495,427 50, against $12,O34,936 III
1875, when the profits on coal were
S3,21627O. 1t is not strange then that the
coal business proper yields loss. Excluding
from the statement of expenses the loss on
leased lines, it appears that the actual cost of
the coal was $7,4O1 ,O96, while the actual
receipts from sales of coal, canal tolls, and
value of coal on hand were only $7,237, G3O 43.
In expenses we include value of coal on hand
at the beginning of the year, cost of coal pur-
chased, mined, transportation, freight ana
canal expenses, RondOut expenses, freight
paid other lines, harbor and yard expenses,
taxes salaries, rent &C., and interest on debt
Hence it seems mdisputable that the coal
operations of the company, apart from the
working of leased lines, resulted in loss OF
S163,4G5 81 during the year, although for
three-fOurths of that year the combination
prices ruled.
But we have not included three items placed
by the company under the head of receipts,
because it does not appear that, if truly stated
they properly belong to the coal business.
These are "profts of miscellaneous railroad
earnings in Pennsylvania, $3OG,911 42"-
an item " hich is inexplcable rs it stands, and
does not belong to the coal business IN any
case '"interest on investments, $33S,93 49,"
an item which needs further calculation f; and
miscellaneous profits, 1891, O47 81" Now
we are truly sorry to see that the Delaware
and Hudson is trespassing upon the peculiar,
preGmpted and exclusive right of the New
York Central to have miscellaneous earn
"ings." The trick was so very thin, and in the
case of the Central had been so completely
exposed, that the coal company would have
done better if it had either omitted that item
altogether, or explained by what sale of secu-
rites or property this sum was misceaneously
earned. Unhappily, however, the entire re-
ported profit was only $30S,O20 10, so that If
the company had not made miscellaneous
profits" it would not have made any profits
at all.
A net loss of 1855, 4O5 90 on leased lines is
confessed. In September last we showed that
the charge for interest and rental on leased
lines must considerably exceed $S50000, and
the company now admits that interest, rental,
and dividends on leased linesn amount to
S1,613, S34 2S. The total receipts from rail-
way service are $4,000, 677 90, and the Oper-
atng expenses are said to be only $2,004,-
249 81 but the company does not report ex-
penditures for construction, and judiciOusly
puts in as an asset the sum of $250,63 81
expended on the New-YOrk and Canada road
in excess of $4,000, 900 in stock and funded
debt.
We have only time to-day to notice one or
two of the peculiarties of the balance sheet,
which is, like man, "fearfully and wonderfully
"made." Canal, railroad, and real estate are
put in at cost, and the stakeholder who sus-
poets that property bought or works constructed
in the days of inflated prices may not be
worth as much now, should listen to the Presi-
dent, who solemnly AYERS that the real estate