Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-05-02

citation, S2Zi.W.
Stand pipe taking an amount between
Allen and Gray on the depreciation,
s6113.19.
| Stand pipe foundation agreed to be
sl,624G0 Mr. Gray and Mr.. Allen say
there ought to be a depreciation Of 4-1O of
10. While that only amounts to $3.50 it is
the strongest illustration in this whole
| case of the necessity of carrying annual
| depreciation at sum sufficiently high to
meet the contingencies of physical de-
probation, of ultimate want CT
efficiency, and an ultimate loss Of
the thing itself. Whenever the
Home is abandoned the stand pipe
| and it's foundation are worthless,
not even worth the taking down.
That long line through those fields is in
the nature of a service pipe reaching out
not to a town but as it were to one
house with twenty-three hundred people
living in it and over siXty-six years old.
Real estate not used in connection with
the plant must be taken at its market
value and has no franchise value. The
rights of way, If they have title, would
go in at 81 ,4l3.C0. 1901 90 we admit The
remaining 81 1920 raises a most serious
question of title where 1 gave full oppor-
tunity to the water company to save that
question. The offer was made as a mat
ter of fairness and justice. They prom
Used to comply with its terms but have
not done so. They asked for the law; the
offer is withdrawn.
Materials on hand; agreed valuation,
81, 52O14, but we shall dispute later their
right to collect for certain items
amounting to $i35.46, so that the amount
not in dispute is $1,Os4.6S.
Jumping all these results together
gives us a total of $25S, 54S.92. That Of
course assumes that they own every
thing, that the water is pure. that MOTH
ing is to be done, that the system is
efficient, and that the income, whatever
the lawful income is, is assured. MY
depreciation aggregate would be ST.
1858 leaving the present net value. on
the assumptions just mentioned, $23l,-
1924.
Now the addition to the pumping
station l submit all goes out. That
was built under the supplemental con-
tract with the Edwards Company, ana
in it the Edwards Company says, we
will allow you to go in there and ex-
tend the wheel pit, put up two story
building, and put in your wheel ana
pump, but all such improvements
thus made shall be the property OF SAID
Edwards Company except the wheel
and pump aforesaid which shall remain
| the property of said water company.
Now that would take out $341S.56 from
my table.
1 submit that the original pumping
station is also excluded by the original
lease of the Edwards Company of Au-
gust -, 1886, and that the title always
has been and is in the Edwards Com
pany, resulting in a further deduction
of s7S3.05.
The next element of deduction is the
filter plant, house and shed. on the
same rule of law which governed the
original pumping station, and that
would take out s1,016.S4.
The bridge over the canal would fol-
| low the same rule of law as the filter
plant, and would take out S277.00.
| Now as to the pumping machinery
Whatever was put in under the sup
Elemental contract where the Edwards
Company reserved title to everything
except the wheel and the pump, OF
course is clear. The various items in
l
s479.39, are, I submit. improvements"
and should be deducted at the present
value of s2516S3 Under the lease
everything in the nature of real estate
everything that was to be Il permanent
thing, was necessarily to be the proper
ty of the Edwards Mfg. Co.
| Part of pump No. /, valued net
$GO4.S0. was put in under the original
lease and should be deducted.
| Now the deductions for the rights of
way. The county commissioners
awarded +. H. Chadwick $3.50 for the
hight of way over his land. Mr.. Chad
wick would not accept the award. The
pipe is there. There is no controversy
that that taking and all the other talk
ings were utilities, having been filed
| in the office of the register of deeds in
stead of the office of the city clerk. The
company owes $50 as lien upon its
pipe line which must be deducted. The
remaining items amount to $1.112.00.
| This was paid out by the company to
| these individuals from whom some re-
ceipts We're taken. but the takings We're
utilities. We offered to accept quit
claim deeds from the present owners
whoever they might be. They prom
sed us indemnity and said it would be
produced. / said / would accept it but
as this has not been done the offer on
our part is withdrawn. The burden of
proof to show title to their pipe line
wherever it crosses any mans land
they have not sustained. and the dis
trict should not be compelled to run the
risk of another payment to new own
ers or to others if the different parties
had no title. To get q title we must
retake, and whoever owns the land on
the date when we file those takings
will get the damages. Further, it is
in the nature of Il mortgage on their
pipe line. and you must deduct not only
the S1.112 that is in my table. but give
us S1.112 more out of what would be the
| physical table of values. or including
| the $3.50 of Chadwick, a total deduction
| of. S2,374
| Now as to the amount of materials on
hand. I attack s435. 46. The company had
n practice of putting in the service pipes.
furnishing all materials and labor, and
making certain charges for the work and
material that were paid by the takers 1t
u