Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-02-06
A HEARING ON GAS
Attorney GoIdsborough Opposes
Madden Bill. -:
TELLS. COMPANY'S TRIALS
But Does Not Give the Cost of Manu-.
facture.
NO UNIVERSAL TRANSFERS
President Dunlop Says Law Formed
by Mr.. Madden Has No
Binding Force.
NO UNIVERSAL TRANSFERS

Binding Force.
The House District committee gave n
hearing today to representatives of the in
terests opposed to the Madden gas bill and
universal transfer measure. Attorney Colds
borough appeared for the Washington Gas
Light Company; President Dunlop of the
Capital Traction Company denounced the
transfer bill; Wilton J. Lambert advised
the committee to go slow and feel its way,
/ and representatives of citizens associa-
tons urged the committee to find the ac-
tual cost of gas manufacture before fixing
price to the consumer. The hearing was
rather dull, being enlivened only by Rep
resentative Simms of Tennessee and Presi-
dent Dunlop, who while engaged In a dis
cussion of franchise and stock values man.
aged to amuse the committee. The hear
ing was adjourned at noon when the House
met and will be continued at 10 o'clock on
the morning of the 18th instant.
Mr.. Darneille's Opposition.
Hopewell II. Darneille, formerly District
assessor. said he appeared in opposition to
the bill for 75-cent gas. He was not in
the pay of the company and didn't expect
ever to be in the pay of the company but
he was opposed to the bill matter OF
equity. If the people who favored 75-cent
gas were sincere, he wouldn't mind 1t SO
much. Most of them were business men Of
Washington who controlled the prices OF
necessities of life and who were never
known to take a cent off the price of butter
or eggs or anything else that they dealt in.
Mr.. Darneille said he wanted to call at
tention to the fact that at present the price
of labor was high and the laying of gas
mains more expensive than formerly. Fur
Their than this, reduction in the price OF
gas from 81 to 10 cents would reduce the
taxes paid to the District by the gas COM
pany about one-fourth.
Are you expert in your knowledge Of
gas mains and of gas manufacture asked
Representative Simms.
Mr.. Darneille admitted that he not.
| and in reply to further questions admitted
that he had never had anything to do with
| the laying of gas mains or the making
of gas; that he didn't know what 1t could
be made for or what 1t was now being
made for.
Then" said Mr.. Simms, you appear
here in opposition to this bill merely be-
cause some people you know, who favor II,
will not reduce the price of eggs?'
No; not just eggs" replied Mr.. Dar-
nellie.
Mr.. Simms then led the witness into maxi
ing a number of statements concerning the
valuation Of the gas company which ap-
peared from later testimony to be incor-
hadn't been District assessor since Deem
Der and hadn't seen this years returns
from the gas company.
Didn't Know Where He Was At.
A. s. Kinnan, president of the Brookland
C.iZens' Association, was not able to state
whether he appeared in favor of or in ops
position to the bill.
The association which he represented had
no information to show what ii cost to
make gas, and until they had some infor-
nation they didn't care to be put in the
attitude of favoring or opposing the meas
ure. They did not want cheap gas If the
gas company was to be injured by the de-
NAL of a fair return upon its investment.
He thought the committee should take
| steps to find out first of all just exactly
| what it cost to make gas and should then
! endeavor to legislate upon this basis. He
| was very much in favor of the Morrell bill.
| which provides for an investigation OF
various local public utilities by committee
| Of Congress during the approaching recess.
| the committee to report at the converting OF
! Congress next fall.
| Representative Morrell interrupted the
| witness at this point to say that when his
| bill was taken up for consideration he in
| tended to amend it by providing that the
investigation contemplated be made by the
bureau of corporations of the Department
| of Commerce and Labor instead of by a
| Congress committee The bureau already
has the machinery for such an inquiry, and
Mr. Morrell thought that better results
would follow the inquiry by the bureau.
| Gas Company's Attorney.
IT,
| Washington Gas Light Company. followed
| Mr.. Kinnann He called attention to the
| fact that the sworn statement which had
| been submitted by the company to
| the District committee showed TO the
| 1OOOth part of cent just what 1t
| cost to make gas last year Approx
imately the cost OF 90 m ai ,h, ana
| cubic feet. Mr.. Goldsborough said he
| would leave the statement to speak for IT.
| self. and would devote himself largely to
| the general proposition which had been
| presented by the author of the I5-cent gas
| bill, Representative Madden of Illinois, at
| the meeting last Thursday. He was obliged
| to Mr. Madden for the latter's frank state
| ment and said he differed with him only
| as to the facts. Otherwise Mr.. Maddens
| position he thought was unassai,able. for
| the latter had said that every public utility
was on all tours with every other public
utility as to privileges and tax burdens, ana
| was entitled to a fair. but not unreasonable.
return upon it's investment This, Mr..
| Goldsborough said, was not only common
| sense, but common law, and he quoted from
| decisions Of the Supreme Court OF the
United States in support Of his position
| pointed out that because the bonded debt
of the local gas concern was only 100000
] while the bonded debt OF the Peoples Gas
| Company OF Chicago was about $6OOO0Oo-
one being abnormally low and the other
| abnormally high-the local concern should
| therefore supply gas at a much cheaper
/ rate than the chicago company. but' ac-
cording to his view Mr.. Goldsborough said.
| the bonded debt proposition had nothing at
all to do with the price at which either OF
these companies should supply gas. Tho
paper capitalization, no matter how large.
and no matter how small, could not prop
erly increase or diminish the rights Of tho
owners and the equity Of the public. He
| went so far as to say that IL either of the
companies had no paper capitalize ton at
aIl-and, according to the census reports.
there were several concerns in this cate
gory-the owners would be protected by law
and entitled to fair and reasonable re-
turn.
Further than this. Mr.. Goldsborough
urged that the fact that the local gas COM
pany had been prosperous in the past was
not relevant in connection with the PROPOSE
| ton of a fair return at the present time.
| He thought that it should not be forgotten
| that a large share of the credit for the
company's success was due to the efforts