The daily morning journal and courier., 1898-11-23
JUDGE HALL MAKES ANSWER
TO OBJECTION TO ". r., ". 1T. IND II,
 R. R. COMPANIES TAX RETURNS.

The Three Exceptions Made by HenryL.
 Goodwin Answered in DetaiI-Taxcs
 Paid by the Company to the State Since
 1ss5-Lcngth of the Lime in the state--
 Fixing of Values.
 Judge John M. Hall yesterday ap- peared before the state board of equal- ization to answer the objections made by Henry l.. Goodwin of Hartford to the tax returns of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad company to that board for the present year. The answer was as follows:
 To the Honorable Board of Equaliza@
 tion of the State of Connections:
 appear here to-day to answer briefly the objections made by MT. Goodwin to the tax returns of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad company to your board for the present year, copy of which was furnished me last evening. Three exceptions to the returns of this company are made by
 
 board. In replying to these objections I shall consider them in reverse order.
 1. As to the company's alleged ad- vances to the Harlem River and Port Chester Railroad company. This sub- ject I decline to discuss before this honorable board on the ground that this whole subject was thoroughly and exhaustively argued and considered by your board last year, with the result that after full discussion and investi- gation, your board found that the ex- penditures claimed to have been made by this company on the Harlem River and Port Chester railroad were abso- lutely correct and should be deducted under the provisions of section 1923 of the general statutes. Nothing has oc- cured during the past year to alter or in any way change the conclusions reached by you last year in regard to this matter.
 During the year, at the request of MT. Goodwin, I extended an invitation to both the members of this board to ac- company MT. Goodwin on trip over the Harlem River and Port Chester road in order that you might see for yourselves ct what points and in what way the large expenditures of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Rail- road company on the Harlem River branch had been made. You saw there the great freight terminal of this com pany, with it's large floating equipment. with it's extensive and costly freight yards atHarlem River and VanNest and Westchester, and large tracts of land in the city of New York near Harlem River bought for increased freight fa- cilities, with nearly sixty miles of freight tracks on this twelve-nlile branch, with it's force of clerks and op- eratives employed at that point, with its great number of switching engines and crews necessary in transferring to and from the Jersey shore and our piers about $500 cars every day in the year, with its our-tracking, as well as the elimination of grade crossings, accom- plished and in process, and I believe all the parties must have been satisfied that the amount charged could easily have been expended on that line since this company leased it in 1873. Every item of the account rendered for these expenditures on this leased line, which lies wholly within the state of New York, is absolutely correct and suscep- tible of proof before any tribunal. It is correctly charged upon the books of the company and they are open to your inspection, if you care to examine them. The intimation from any source that the state of Connecticut has ever lost one dollar, or a fraction of a dollar, by any improper deduction for taxation on account of these expenditures in anoth- CT state is utterly without foundation. On the other hand it can be shown that between the years 1881 and 1889 the state of Connecticut gained several thousand dollars by reason of the fail- ure of the New Haven company to claim deductions on this account which they, under the statute might have claimed.
 It is proper to add that this entire property during all this period has been fully taxed under the laws of the state of New York, where it is properly tax able, and such taxes have annually been paid in full,
 It is fair also to call attention to the fact that this claim has been passed upon by the boards of equalization of this state in the years 1891, 1893, 1895 and again last year by your board, all boards having found the returns of the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad company on this subject ab- solutely correct. I therefore dismiss this objection as one fully settled by the action of previous boards of equal ization as well as your own board, and unworthy further consideration. 2. As to the market value of the com- pany's capital stock. Under the pro- visions of section 3931 of the statute, regulating the return as to the value of capital stock, the treasurer of the New Haven road has reported it's value to you at 190, being the average of the closing bids or offers for said stock dur ing the month of September last, as published in the Commercial and Fi- nancial Chronicle" of the doings of the New York stock exchange, the correct ness of which valuation he is ready to verify by the published record which he has now before you.
 While this was the average of the bids for the stock during September, yet the provisions of section 3931 give your board the power to fix the value of the stock at another price, if you deem a different valuation advisable and for the best interests of the state. The treasurer submitted claim that