Omaha daily bee., 1902-07-12

that was the only one, and different reports
that the railroads made subsequently.
Q.-was the information before you that
for at least three years. 1895, 1895 and 1897.
that the Elkhorn road had been operated
at a lossf A.-No, sir, I don't remember
that.
Q.-was not there some years in which
there were dencitsf Was that considered
by your Awe did not look far enough
back to find that, l do not think; that Is
my recollection.
Q.-was that called to your attention at
all; that It was operated at q loss1 Al
think the fact was mentioned by Mr.. Bid
well with reference to some prior years.
Q.-Yes, sir, that Is what l meant. A.
Yes, sir, but that is all.
Odd you not have a document before
you which was prepared by Mr.. whitney,
showing the sales Of real property In diff
ferent counties, and showing what the
property had been assessed fort Ayes,
sir, I did.
o.-Is that documen among the docu-
ments that have been offered in evidence
here2 A.-No, sir, II Is not.
Q.-Do you know where that Isl Al
do not.
Q.-But you had such q document3 A.
l had such a document; It disappeared
from my desk and l don't know where It is.
Q.-You do not know where It k7 A.
No, sir.
Dwell, II was from that document,
with other and the other evil
dence which you arrived finally at the con-
clusion as to what the assessment Of the
various railroads in the state of Nebraska
should be for the purposes Of taxationI
Ayes, sir, together witt a general
knowledge OF the situation in the state.
Q.-General knowledge Of what assess
ments had been and were1 Ayes, sir.
Redirect Examination by Mr.. Harrington
Calling your attention to the statement
purporting to be dated in April, and made
on behalf Of the Burlington company, Mr..
Weston, as q matter Of fact was that ever
placed in your hands until after the as
sessments were NADER Ayes. sir; my
recollection Is that we had that prior to
the meeting Of the board.
Q.-Wasn't that prepared after Mr.. Rose
water made his argument, some daysf A.
NO. sir. 1 think not.
Q.-Now, sir. you say you took into con-
sideration the stock and bond Of the Union
Pacific, do you? A.-No, sir, l did not say
that.
Q.-what did you say with reference to
| BLUR ahu a. oSA NAAAN 49,
records show that / made any statement
as to stock and bonds.
Odd you, or did you not, ascertain
the value of the Union Pacific per mile
A.-so far as the tangible property is con-
cerned, we attempted to do that.
Q.-Only the tangible property A.
That was my understanding at that time
Q.-You took the testimony that Engi-
neer Berry gave in the penalty case In the
federal court as to the cost Of reproducing
the Union Pacific railroad? Al don't
think, as q matter Of fact, that we paid
very much attention to that estimate.
DIN any event, all you assessed or at
tempted to value In any respect with ref
erence to the Union Pacific railroad wal
the tangible property Of the corporation
A.-That was our view of the matter. yes
sir. CON TAI.
Q.-You did not assessor did not at
tempt to assess or place a value In an!
respect upon the franchise or ~intangfbl,
property Of the corporation1 A.-No, sir.
Q.-You never took into consideration IL
contract with the Rock Island or Mil
waukee for the use Of the Union Pacin'
bridget Al knew nothing about that.
nQ-The reports before you showed tina
those contracts existed. Al overlooked
It.
Odd you take into consideration tn
fact that It was owner Of stock in tn
Union Pacific Land company to the amour
Of &c. OO, 000f A.-No, sir, we did not.
Odd you take into consideration tn
fact that 1t was the owner Of coal stock
to, the amount Of 5000, OoO7 Ave did not
no.
Odd you know as q matter Of fact tha
the statement filed by the Union Pacih
was misleading In the fact that they max
J deductions for bonds Of more than tn
whole bonded debt? A.-You mean unde
section sS2
Q.-Yes, sir. A.-No, sir.
Ono, nc, that last paper theret This
A.-No. sir, 1 did not examine that critic
ally. / don't know anything about It.
o.-You did not know that that t3a2 900,
! 900 Is all misleadingf
Mr.. BaIdwin-That Is objected to as In
competent. irrelevant and immaterial.
Q.-Do you know whether the statemer
by which they deducted $685.. 600. 900 froI
I supposed assets OF the company is correS
or not? Al don't know; / did not in
: yestigate those figures at all.
> o.-But yet. sir. hat is the very tabl
OF which Governor Savage made the eati
: mate that the Union Pacific railroad wa
4 worth only t45.O 900 a mile. is it mott A.
don't know.
Q.-You know that he claimed that wa
: the basis7 A.-That was my recollectio
Of the conversation between Governc
: Savage and Mr.. Rosewater.
: Q.-You do not know today and you car
not inform this court at this time whS
1 the Union Pacific railroad is worth q mil
can you? A.-Probably not, sir.
: Q.-You had no information before 20
as to the number OF thousands Of dollaI
Of stock against each mile Of the Unto
Pacific railway in Nebraskaf A.-No. oil
> 1 believe not.
i. .Q-You did not know then and you d
: not know now the funded debt Of Ii
, Union Pacific railroad in Nebraskaf A.
1 did not; no. sir.
o.-You did not know then and you d
: not know now the total funded debt Of III
: Union Pacific railroad? A.-No, sir.
o.-You did not know then aAd you d
not know now the amount of the preferre
: stock and the value thereof Of the Unto
Pacific railroads? A.-No. sir, / do not.
Q.-You did not know then and you d
not know now the amount OF its commo
stock and the value thereof. do your A.
!, No. sir.
Q.-You simply took the statement that
. cost about 5000 o a mile to reproduce II
A.-As l said a moment ago. l do not thin
- -. 800.