The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-08

ancc at the rate OF S7h0,0o0 annually. In
reply TO questions. MIR. Powers said the
committee had calculated on $4,000. 900 an
nuasly us the net earnings Of tho roads.
why do You allow per cent on the |
stock of the company" asked Mr.. Lacey
tRep.) CT Iowa.
10 tempt the stockholders to enter into
the arrangement. We could not ask them
TO go on with no prospects OF dividend"
What is the present value of the stock
on which you propose TO pay per cent?"
| asked Mr.. Moody tRep.) OF Massachusetts.
Central Pacific is worth SIS; Union Pa
elf, Is s11."
Can the companies comply?" asked Mr.. |
Mc&'reary tDem.l of Kentucky.
THAT is the vital question" replied Mr.. |
! Powers we think they can. The con- |
| ditiou OF the roads could not well be worse |
| than II has been during the last few years" |
| Figuring on the net earnings OF the road |
at 81 .00o, 900 each, the charges, allowing for |
interest on first mortgage and against the |
Central Pacific, would be sS.Ss5,ssO and |
against the Union Pacific ss,6as,5as.
| Mr.. Powers, In replying to a question
about the security the road offered the gov
| eminent under the proposed now lien. said
| the Pacific railroad committee six years ago
| estimated the value OF the additional see
| curlty at s92 000. 600.
THE question Is" said he. shall we
undertake 10 collect those debts or ruth
| lessly throw them away? We must ad-
dress ourselves to the protection OF the
governments interests and we present this
bill as the best possible plan.
Mr.. Hubbard. who had charge Of the OPP
position to the measure. followed Mr. Pow.
ors with an extended argument. He
, plunged at once into the subject. He
agreed with MIR. Powers that the question
was purely one of business. The construct
OTIS of tho Pacific roads. he said, had
earned profits OF s6?. 600 900 and the roads
) had paid siS 100000 in dividends. His
: purpose In citing these facts was to show
that those In control OF the COMPANIES
were strong. while the corporations pleaded
bankruptcy md INABILITY 10 pay. He based
> his arguments against the bill on these
points.
e The Pacific railway committee had
learned enough OF the condition Of the
companies as to be able to cope with the
i hest plans suggested; that the companies
made offers before the committee and arc
: ready to concede terms very much better
A for the government than those IN the bill.
G and that the propositions In the bill are
neither good or safe for the government.
Il These he sail. would net the government
y 81 400 900 annually In interest or so ono coo
with the sS5 600 annuity, or sos, 1000 600
In fifty years. counting tho preferred
l. stock as worthless by comparison. he
Q said the offer the committee rejected was
G s4S COO 900 better than the ono the govern :
!, meni would accept under the hill. On the
s other hand, he said. the California dele
Q cation without exception opposed any bill
y that would place the Central and Southern
u Pacific under the same control. The gov
e eminent directors. w. ]. Coombs and u.
. Anderson. had advocated foreclosure by
d the government and the union of the Con-
trail ard Union Pacific. The secretary o
c the interior had advocated foreclosure by
+ the government, and MIR. Hubbard insisted
Y that the main lines OF the Central and
h Union pacaflc should be united for the
e support of the security which must be
n1t cd 10Y
!. were worth much more as through line
d than IL separated. The average net earn
's ngs OF the Union Pacific for the past ter
a years. he said. We're $1,000, o00. yet the bill
l. was based on earnings OF but 81 1000 900 a..
y MIR. Hubbard criticised severely some 81
a the financlerlng Of the Union Pacific. espe-
- cially Ia the matter OF certain lions givs'
e and coliateials deposited He went int
y, the question of diversion OF business
l. tho Southern Pacific. The absolute ne
i. earnings Of the Central from 1874 TO lSS
nj were $4,000 900. and during that period /
- paid $50 coo. coo dividends The road wa
nc then almost entirely in the hands Of Hunt
Is ington Stanford Hopkins and Crocker. s
S. that they received practically all the divi
+ deuds. when they had unloaded the solin
1t ern was built. which leased the Central
10 and the latter stopped paying dlvldend'
10 This lease would continue under thi
10 bill Under the bill the Central debt woui'
'e be extended clghty-sx years. that OF III
20 Union Pacific eighty three years and tn
l. debt made worthless On second mortgage
10 when Mr. Hubbard concluded there wal
e a round of applause from tho opposition
: TO the bill.
~ Mr.. Bell (Dem) OF Texas. member o
c the Pacific railroad committee. took III
c floor also In antagonism to The measure
g He began by saying that the builders O
II the Pacific railways were entitled to nj
consideration. The quits growing out o
n their Inanipulations were blot on civiiiza
h ton and the age None Of those men, III
: said had a right to ask congress TO extent
q to it the great privilege granted by TIM
lie bill He addressed himself as to whether
II the government had lien on terminals
n He Insisted the government did, and b.
70 express provisions in the original act ant
h confirmed by the ninth section OF thu
Thurman act. He admitted that the road
q had not been making satisfactory earn
IF ings for years,
y ''Why?' he shouted dramatically. BE
= cause 1t was not in he interest Of those IL
q control 10 make money for the roads,
q (Applause)
g That's It exactly" cried Mr.. Bowers o
% California.
L Mr.. Bell said the pending bill proceeded
!, on tho wrong theory. The present earn
. ings were figured out and the bill mad
i TO conform 10 tho present earnings. ~
+, said the guarantee in the bill OF tho South.
"a crn Pacific for S2i 900, 900 was made muci
a
= was one thing and the Southern Pacif,'
:. OF California another. The former mad
= the guarantee In the bill, the latter wa
, the railroad. The Kentucky corporation
y, was Il mere corporation to operate rail
" roads not 10 own them. 1t leased th'
- Southern aad other roads. Did any one be-
. iieve, he asked. that that corporation wouie
not wind up It's business rather than pa,
sci GOO 600? He described the allege
: manner in which Mr.. Huntington ha'
a manipulated the roads in his interest. say
a. Ing AT the same time that he had no desir'
to denounce capital.
Mr. Bell then explained the substitute h
- had proposed, which provided that II tn
u roads would make the United States secur,
by paying of the first mortgage bonds tn
s. government would extend the debt any rea
y scnable period at per cent. The road
&c could do this.
Al In the course OF his remarks he said h
10 did not want to commit the government II
II any way TO the doctrine OF the government
2 ownership OF railroads. sentiment tina
ie was literally applauded
r. Mr Grow (Rep.1 of Penusylyauia OcCu