The Sunday morning news. [volume] (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1886-1891, 1889-12-29
Orders by Mail Telephone Promptly Attended
to- Goods Delivered Free to All Parts of Hudson
County
CHAS. 5. FURST.


and interest, 81, 1856 900 10: first the
amount of discount and interest included
in the above, together with the interest
thereon, $377, 4S0 90; second. land not used
for railroad purposes, S104. 54S. 49, and tools
and machinery, 3d. SIS. o. making total
to be deducted of 1891, 70S 05-the balance
still due the State on tax would be $751;
341. 3S principal, and $3.50. 81 interest,
making total of principal and interest
still due the State after deducting these
various items of 1913, 391. o.
And a tabulated statement was sub
mitted showing the result should any one
of those items be excluded.
PLEAS IN BAR.
The argument was closed by most
eloquent burst OF sarcasm and irony for
the setting up by the company in their
answer of pleas in bar to the
tration of the matters in dispute and
then saying to the arbitrators you cannot
arbftrate these matters, by reason of the
fact that the claim Is barred by the
statute of limitations by the action of the
Comptroller, who as the officer of the
State, by virtue of his authority adjusted
these matters at the time, etc. The fol-
lowing are some of the Attorney
Generals remarks:
81 Theranswer, in law, is perfect. Time
cannot run against the State. y
No court of law in the civilized world
of the pleas of estoppel which have been
set up here"
But the gentleman says his argument
is much deeper than all that. 1t is his
answer. 1t may be the whole depth of
his answer The gentlemen's arguments
may be very deep, but If he is not careful
he will plunge his company,
From the depths of their deep
To deeper gulch STILL
And it may be, as was said of the man
IN the scriptures, that the last state of
this company will be worse than the
first.
is it right, is it fair, is it in accordance
with the spirit of equity and justice that,
having granted them this arbitration
which they asked for, they should at
tempt to set up these pleas which any
honest man would hesitate to set up in q
Court OF law, but which are brought i'll
here as bars and barriers, to prevent you
from giving a decision which | say
from the best Judgment can form, would
be more for the interest of this company
today than of the State?'
GOV. BEDLE'S COUNTER CALCULATION
And now Governor Bedle has got up
little statement of his own which is very
interesting, and no doubt will be read
With good deal of interest 1t will be
remembered that Mr.. Gummere's arCu-
ment was that as soon as the point was
reached where the net proceeds of the
company amounted to seven per cent. on
the cost, the company was liable to pay a
tax every year thereafter irrespective of
whether 1t earned seven per cent. after or
not. 1t has appeared in the case that in
one OF the years away back in the fifties
there was charged off to depreciation in
rolling stock in the books of the COM
pany, $50, 000
chareiug oil an amount in depreciation
OF rolling stock, charged it ali off in this
year. The way Mr.. Stevens apportions
it annually is as follows; To 1S45, 81
903.6S; 1916, So, 532 So; 1917, 50, $50 81; 1S4S.
81, 1880; lS49, 50, 532. "a; 1850, "a, $50. O5:
1851, s4.2lS.9l: 1852, 81 S37. So; 1858, So, $685..
40; 1854, IS, 403. 90; 1865, IS, 45OS3, and 1855.
IS, 1929. The Ex-Governor in his argu
ment on Friday stated that according to
Stevens the surplns over per cent. of
81 1892 20 is practically wiped out by the
amount OF depreciation he has appor-
toned to that year.
II 1916, there was deficiency in net
profits In 1S4T. the surplus over seven
per cent. according to Stevens, was
81, 79l 81 and the amount of depreciation
apportlonable to that year s., $50 81 which
swallows up the surplus, of course. In
1850, Stevens surplus is 81, 1898. SO, and the
amount he has apportioned to that year
for depreciation is "a, 1905, swallowing
up the surplus by over two thousand dol
lars. In 1858, Mr.. Stevens surplus over
Jne seven per cent. was CI,237.61 and the
amount he has apportioned to that year
for depreciation is ST, 6s3S. 40. thereby
nearly wiping out the surplus
In 1854 his surplus is S., s33 so, and the
amount ne has apportioned to deprecia-
ton for that year is IS, 403 so. And there
was continuous depreciation after 1854
for good many years The point of this
statement is this-If the arbitrator
should decide that this $4,000 of de
probation should be taken ont of net
earnings and that the company was
when the profits reached per cent. on
cost, the claim of the State for all those
years must, of course, be disallowed On
the other hand, If Mr.. Gummere's argu-
ment is sustained, then. Notwithstanding
the depreciation charged off for 1885,
there was a surplus over the per cent,
| and the company is liable from that time
down.