The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-12
PERU GAS BOND STANDS
JUDGE BAKER REFUSES TO MODIFY
HIS TEMPORARY ORDER.
Ahidavfts as to Expenses in Drilling
WeIIs-COst and Receipts
of the Plant.

The Peru gas injunction case was argued
before Judge Baker, of the Federal Court,
yesterday upon motion of the city TO mod
ify the temporary restraining order. The
court in granting the temporary injunction
against the enforcement of the ordinance
reducing the price of natural gas at Peru
one-third had required the company to give
bond that in the event the case was finally
determined against it, it would rebate the
excess charges The city several days ago
filed an answer and cross bill to the com
plant of the company, asking an injunc-
ton, and a few days later filed a motion
attacking the bond furnished by the COM
pany and asking that the company be re-
quired to pay these excess charges over the
rates allowed by the new ordinance into
court pending the litigation. This motion
Judge Baker yesterday overruled, after
hearing argument on the subject all morn
ing.
The Peru gas litigation differs from that
of indianapolis in some respects. 1t con-
Germs natural gas, while the local litigation
has to do with Illuminating gas only. Then
the attorneys for the city of Peru are in
clined to push matters. The company in
volved is the Logansport & Wabash Valley
Gas Company, owned by the Benedict syn
Gas Company.
Before the argument began yesterday,
Manager Buslong, of the company, filed an
affidavit declaring that the company was
drilling new wells for Peru at an expense
of $4,000, and the total receipts from Peru
for the year would not reach that sum. The
opening statement for the city was made
by A. G. Harris, who declared that the city
was not asking a dissolution of the injunc-
ton now, because the company was threat
ening to shut off gas from the city II the
ordinance were enforced. He declared that
the Baltimore Surety Company ON the bond
was a long distance away and hard to get
at; that the gas company was bonded for
more than it was worth and could not well
be reached, and that the bond was made
to the city and this would add to the diff
Guilty of the private consumer trying to re-
cover upon it. The court asked some cues
tions about the loading up OF the company
with securities and Mr.. Harris referred the
matter to Mr.. Winter, the companys attor-
ney, but the latter did not volunteer any
information.
said Mr. Harris was laboring under mis-
take in assuming that the city would flnally
win it's case. He declared that the company any
Pipe Line Company, and the cost Of us
plant was $277 600 instead of $4,000 as
aV6freQ In the CITY y aIlSWcI. I1G OCAlS0
that $175 900 had been paid in dividends. he
said that in 1887 the city of Peru had passed
an ordinance regulating the price of gas at
such point that nobody would undertake
to pipe gas to the city under its terms; ana
the ordinance was later amended ana ac-
cepted by the original company. In May,
1885, the old company was purchased by the
present corporation, which accepted the
amended ordinance. If the rates we're un-
reasonable, the city should not then have
accepted the company's acceptance and
bond He declared that the company was
entitled to earn fair dividends upon the
value of it's plant. The total receipts are
$50 goo a year and the expenses $50 900 year.
The new ordinance would cut recelpeS down
to S3S 900 a year. This would cut OH the
sinking fund and would not give the owners
l per cent. upon their investments.
Mr. Winter told how the Benedict syndl-
cate had had terribly hard time or 1t IN
the gas field. Local companies had taken
the cream of the business when the pronts
were big, and then had unloaded upon me
syndicate. He said that the value OF the
plants was represented by the bonds, ana
the stock was given away as oonus with
them He declared that the company had
never threatened to shut off gas at Peru,
and as its legal adviser he had advised that
it had no right so to do. He explained that
the business of paying the money into court
was an expensive method, and declared that
If the court did not believe the present bond
ample the company stood ready to furnish
any kind of a bond the court might direct.
Messrs. Lawrence and Statesman spoke
briefly and the court overruled the motion,
declaring that it believed the security ample.