The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-10-30
WHO OWNS THE CONSUMERS GAS
PLANT!

When the Consumers Gas Trust Com
pany was formed 1t was hoped and ex-
pected that the supply of natural gas would
be perpetual. Had the supply continued
and had the certificate holders received
their principal and interest their claims
on the trust would clearly have ceased.
They would have had no more claim than
one who had never been a stakeholder,
and the only remaining party in interest
would have been the city, as trustee for
the people. But conditions have changed.
The gas supply has almost ceased and will
soon cease altogether. This great change
is the fault of no one. but 1t Is a great loss
to someone. and someone must suffer. Who
is the sufferer? Certainly not the original
stakeholder. He has not lost anything.
nor will he. He has had a profitable in
vestment- He has received his principal
and interest, all he contracted for, all he
expected to receive, and all that in law
or equity he could receive. Clearly, 1t is
the city that is the sufferer by the loss
of its expected perpetual supply of natural
gas at cost. But, although the supply Of
natural gas has given out there remains a
large and valuable property. To whom
does that belong? Certainly not the orig
inal stockholders. for their claim has been
extinguished by the forms OF the original
contract and by actual payment The city,
as one party to the contract, gave the COM
pany the use Of the streets and permitted
to fha haf
was estimated would In time pay all ex-
penses. repay the original cost and s per
cent. interest. That was to end all claim
of the original stockholders, and thereafter
the beneficial interest was to be in the city.
The price permitted for gas was mode of
been paid, and all but a small part of the
original cost has been repaid with interest
by the people. The stockholders have re-
ceived from the people all they were en-
titled to, and the beneficial interest is now
in the city. The original claim of the
stockholders was in the nature of a lien or
mortgage which has been paid and salts
fed. The city, by paying a higher price
for the gas than 1t was really worth, has
bought out and paid for the property and is
now the legal owner of ii in its capacity
trustee for the people, by purchase and
payment in cash and according to the con-
tract In equity, and the Journal believes
in law, the whole plant and property,
bought and paid for by the peoples money.
now belongs TO the city as trustee, not
merely so much of the plant as lies within
the city, but all OF 1t, leases, pipelines, ma
chinery and everything. 1t has all been
paid for by the city through its citizen
consumers. Had the gas supply continued
there would be no question but when the
stockholders had received back their sub
scriptions with per cent. interest their
interest would have ceased and the city
would have been the only party in inter
est. The fact that the gas has given out
does not change the equitable or legal situ-
alton. The claim that the stockholders
own a valuable property which has been
paid for by the people has no foundation
in law or equity.
If the board of directors to be elected
next week does not move forward to carry
out the plan laid down in the articles of
incorporation of the company, it will then
be time for the city, as trustee for the
people, to apply to the courts to compel a
carrying out of the trust created.