St. Paul daily globe., 1895-06-25
Is NOW BEING HEARD IN THE
GREAT NORTHERN AP-
PEAL
IN THE GRAIN RATE CASE.
EXPERIENCED RAILROAD MEN
SUBMIT ESTIMATES OF THE
VALUE OF ROADS.
MAIN ITEM OF DIFFERENCE
Is with Reference to the Value of
the Terminals in the Twin
Cities. 5s

The hearing of the Great Northern
appeal in the grain rate case was
resumed before Judge Kerr yester-
day. The appellant rested, and the
respondents began the introduction
of testimony for the state. only
three witnesses were examined.
e. C. Davis, M. T. Thomas and II.
H. Teisberg, secretary of the rail-
road commission. The first two
road work, Davis having been at
one time connected with the con-
Struction department, and Thomas
being an engineer who has been In
the service of various roads at diff
ferent times The substance of their
testimony was that the Great North
ern could be replaced at $22, 500 a
mile, assuming that the terminals at
st. Paul and Minneapolis are not
worth over 81 100000. They estimat-
ed that the entire system in this
state could be reproduced for $31,-
100000
Col CIough says that these wit
nesses failed to take into account
certain items of expenditure, and,
dropping these same items out Of
the estimate submitted by the Off
Gals of his company, there was only
about $4,000,000 difference between
the two estimates-that is, the esti-
mate of the officials was that much
higher than that of the states wit
nesses,
THE PRINCIPAL DIFFERENCE
being with reference to the value
of the terminals, which the states
witnesses estimated at only $1,000,
600 in the Twin Cities, while real
estate experts placed the value at
over three times that figure. The
states witnesses admitted that they
were not experts on the question of
property values in the Twin Cities.
The testimony of Secretary Teisberg
was directed to the question of the
reasonableness of the rates fixed by
the commission. He submitted a COM
parative schedule of the rates fixed by
the Illinois commission and those of
the Minnesota commission, the former
being considerably lower, but he could
not answer as to the relative volume
of traffic in the two states.
Suppose the commission were fixing
a rate from Crookston to Duluth, with
out regard to any other line, what in
your judgment, would be a reasonable
rate?" asked Judge Kerr.
An objection on the part of Attorney
Clapp drew from the court the re-
mark that he was not going to in
vestigate the question of rates for the
entire state, but just for this one line.
1--WE took all the facts into consider
ation-the financial condition of the
company, it's earnings, the volume of
traffic and everything-and made what
we considered a reasonable rate" an
swered the witness.
"You do not seem to understand my
question" said the court, and he then
endeavered to explain again.
The witness said he was not yet clear
as to what the court desired to know,
and then Col. Clough came to the front
with the suggestion that he thought
the court desired to get at the fact as
to whether there had been any dis
crimina tom against Crookston or other
places on the line. Judge Kerr said
that was in part what he wanted to
know
The witness replied that there had
been no discrimination.
Court then adjourned until this
morning.