The San Francisco call., 1897-02-16
The Assessment Matters Should
Not Be in the Latter's
Answer.
A B II Filed to Preserve the Rail!
roads Rights in the Big Grain.
Rate Action.

The Southern Pacific Company's attor-
neys, John CARRIER, E. s. Pillsbury and ].
E. Foulds, yesterday tileu in the United
States Circuit Court a bill of exceptions
to the Railroad Commissioners answer in
the equity suit of the Southern Pacific
versus the Railroad Commissioners.
a copy of the bill of exceptions was
served upon Attorney-G General Fitzgerald.
1t was the last day on which such a bill
could be filed, but the railroad people had
no intention OF letting the matter pass
without exceptions to the Commissioners
answer. To have done SO would, to a cer-
tain extent, have been admitting allega-
tions they had no intention of admitting
This is but another feature growing out
Of the important s per cent grain rate
action. In every exception, of which
there are fifty, the claim set up is that
the statement complained OF is not peril
nent to the case in question, and should
be stricken from the Commissioners
answer.
The first exception is to the defend ants in
their answer annexing copies of 1.-The pre-
tended leases mentioned in the bill and
copies of the respective notifications
thereof made from time to time, which
said copies are marked respectively from
a to N"
The second exemption was to the Com
missioners' answer that in 1894 the South
ern Pacific Company agreed with Sir
Rivers Wilson, the representative of the
European stockholders of the Central
Pacific, that it would pay the European
stockholders a dividend of l per cent per
annum until the Central Pacifc's debt
had been fixed with the United States
l. i.
to So12,OOO year and that the payment
was kept a secret by the Southern Pacific
Company.
The principal exceptions dealt with the
matter of assessing the railroads 5 property.
In the Commissioners answer they
showed that they wanted to bind the rail-
road company TO the statements sworn to
by General Manager A. n. Towne, instead
OF accepting the valuations placed on the
property by the Assessors of the various
counties in which the railroad company
owns property. In other words, the Com
mlssroners wanted the same valuation put
upon the railroads property for rate max
ing as 1t was rated for taxation.
the first in this line of exceptions is to
that part OF the Commissioners answer
which states that in 1894 A. N. Towne
| gave the Board of Examiners the valua-
| tion of the Central Pacitic's roadbeds, roll
| Ing stock. etc., at $6, 702, GIL, and steamers
at $224. 139, and that the assessed values by
| County Assessors for the property was
| $5, 292 759. making little less than SIS,
| 100000 and that the company is estopped
| from having its rates fixed on any other
basis than that fixed by Mr.. Towne.
! The same line of exceptions is made
| with reference to the Com mmissioners' an
| swer relative to the assessments on the
! Southern Pacific Railroad Company of
| California. the California Pacific Railroad
| Company, the Northern Railway Com
pany, the Northern California Company
and the South Pacific Coast Railway, in
which the valuations by A. n. Towne and
the County Assessors on road BEDS roll
| ing stock, steamers and other properties
| are given.
| The company also considers as not per-
| tinent to the issue the Railroad Com
mlssioner's quoting the sections of the
| statutes relative to the taxation of property
| and applying the same to the foregoing z
cases. Another matter that the company
| believes should be eliminated from the
! Commissioners answer is the statement
THAT it is notoriously true" that the rail-
| road company has paid large sums of
money 10 politicians and others to in
| fluence the various officials of the State
and Federal Governments 10 secure special
| favors, etc.
Still another matter to which exception
is taken is the assertion that many of the
| supplies of the Southern Pacific Company
are drawn largely from subsidiary com pa
MES and from Its own officers and stock
| holders.
| Apparently there was one thorn in the
| railroad company's side that pricked a
| little more than some of the others, and
| that was the assertion in the answer
| which says: And in this behalf these de-
| PENDANTS aver that the only principle
which has governed the complaint in this
respect 10 said rates was to charge as