The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-05-17
TO PRESERVE PARITY OF RAIL
ROAD VALUES.

| Some years ago when the Corporation
Commission ordered a reduction of pas.
senger rates, the railroads fought the
contemplated reduction on the ground
that it would deprive them of their right
to earn fair dividend upon their in
vestment They reckoned the value of
their property then from two to three
times as much as it was placed on the
tax-lists for taxation.
The problem with Railroad Commits
slons is to preserve the parity between
railroad values when they are being as
sessed for taxation and when they are
contesting reduction in freight and pas
,, senger rates. We have recently printed
several columns of evidence by high of
ficials of the Southern Railway to the eff
feet that their property is worth mot
weep presidents swore it was worth $780,
900 per mile. Other railroad experts tes-
titled that its true value was mot less
1
than $4,000 per mile" This testimony
came out in suit brought by prominent
Danville shippers asking for lower freight
rates. The Southern Railway contended
that it could not reduce rates because, as
!, the property is worth mot less than $4O,-
600 per mile" it must charge present high
rates to earn a dividend upon the $780,
600 mile valuation. AT the very time
Southern Railway officials were swearing
one that the property was worth mot
less than $4,000 a mile" and the other
that it was worth $4,000 a mile-it was
placed on the tax books in North Caro-
lima at little over $13, 900 mile-or one
| third iof what its officials swore it was
worth Ought not the Corporation Com
| mission to secure and preserve a parity
between valuation for taxation and valu-
alton for freight and passenger rates? If
the Southern Railway is worth $40, 900 a
mile when it fixes its rates for passenger
and freight transportation, it must be
assessed at the same valuation for taxa
ton. If it is worth only $13, 900 per mile for
taxation, the passenger and freight rates
must be reduced to the s1S, 900 per mile
basis. parity of value for taxation and
for rates must be reached and preserved
or the public is wronged
One of the first lawyers in North Caro-
lima, who has been keeping up with the
evidence published, in private letter,
says:
Il have noticed in your paper that you
have been making copious extracts from
the testimony in the case of the Danville
shippers. You have scored a telling ar
gument. You have, however, failed to
advert to the fact that the Circuit Court
of Appeals at Richmond has rendered an
opinion through Judge Boyd sustaining the
Railroad Company to the effect that it,
rates were not unreasonable. / presume
that this opinion is based upon the fact
that the receipts of the railroad company
are not excessively large, considering the
value OF the property, good will, fran
chlses, etc. In other words, the court
holds that because the railroad property
is worth $40, 900 per mile, this entities tho
railroad to charge larger freight rate
than it would If it were worth a less sum
While in considering its right to charge
freight rates the road must be valued at
a high figure, yet when it comes to taxa.
ton it shrinks and becomes only small
percentage of the valuation given it fol
| the purpose of charging freight rates.
have not seen the oninion btIf T am aS
Stunning that this entered into the matter .
A s.swink" from SAC, 900 mile for pas
senger fares and freight rates to 1890
per mile for taxation recalls Vance's story
of the cat fish. and the exclamation O.
the old negro: Great God Almighty, how
it have swunkl"