The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-05-17
MAJORITY OF COMMISSION
 DECLINES TO SUPPORT COMER

there Is some difference of opinion. Tn the case of Smyth vs. Ames above re- ferred to, there was some testimony to the effect that the cost Of carrying domestic freight was four times as much as the cost of carrying through freight per ton mile; there was other testimony that the cost or the snort haul was reasonably double the long haul There was no testimony m that case that the extra cost of domes- tic business was less than 10 per cent
 greater than the cost of all other ouSl-
 ness: nor was there any testimony De- fore this Commission upon the trial or this case that the cost of doing domes- tic business was less than 10 per cent.
 greater than the cost of all other Dusi-
 ness. The tendency of the evidence in this case was to the ~ emec. .na' ho
 aditional cost of doing this business,
 but as 10 per cent. increase from all
 the evidence is perfectly fair to domes-
 tic business. and as that IS the rue
 United States in the Nebraska case, we
 have thought 1t proper to adopt that
 rule in this case and have accordingly
 Value of the Roads.
 It remains therefore to ascertain
 what is the value of the road upon
 which earnings should be computed;
 This is to be done by considering all the elements constituting value, to wit,
 inc cost of construction, the amount
 expended in permanent improvements. the amount in market value or Its bonds and stock, the present as com
 pared with the original cost or con struction, the probable earnings capa- city of the property under particular rates prescribed, and the sum requlreo
 to meet operating expenses: Ihese elements embrace the value or the risl of way, in county and town, road pea, main tracks, second tracks and sidlngs' bridges, trestles, freight and passen- ger depots. shops and machlhery' freight and passenger cars. engines, terminal facilities, and all equiplheh's and betterments. ao,,,x, While 1t is not possible 10 lay uowh any hard and fast rule for the deter
 imitation of value, these are the ere, ments which common judgment would
 suggest as constituting value; and are
 sanctioned by the court in the leaolns case of Smyth vs. Ames as being proper considerations for the determination oi values. Upon this basis the values of the sew erai railroads operating In Alabama have been determined from all the evl-
 dence submitted and the dnird ens eotsn11 nf the respective roads therein mentioneu. We now have the data in reference
 to the domestic business in Alabama, from which may be determined the net result from such business.
 Results From Domestic Business' By taking therefore. such portion ot I the gross earnings diA the domestic business bears to all bust- ness within this State, we arrive at gross income on purely domestlc Dusiss
 ness By adding the, minltn1m of 10 | per cent, for increased cost or domes~ | fic business to the percentage of ope- | rating expenses to gross earnings rom such business. we arrive at the total l cost of doing domestic business. The difference between the gross income | from domestic business and the total cost of doing such business yields. of | course, the net profit upon such busi- mesa. .
 Then by taking such portion of the l valuation of the road as the domestic 1 business in this State bears to tho whole business, we ascertain what DOT | tion of the value of each road Is engaS- | ed in doing the domestic business with | in this State.
 Having ascertained the portion of the value of the road engaged in handling domestic business in Alabama, and the net profit resulting from the handling of ugh business in this State, simple | calculation gives us the percentage l earned in Alabama upon local or do- | nestle business.
 Table two. following is worked out upon the basis suggested and sets