Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-12-16
HEARING on EXCEPTIONS
VALUATION OF PLANT OF
GEORGETOWN GAS COMPANY.
Proceedings Before Justice Gould To-
day-District Given Time
to File Brief.

The hearing on the exceptions to the re-
port of Auditor Payne, valuing the plant
Of the Georgetown Gas Light Company at
$47O. 777.30, was held today in Equity
Court No. 2. before Justice Gould. On
motion of Attorney Thomas for the Dis
trict Commissioners, the court allowed
him until January 2. 1908. to file brief
covering the question of the ownership OF
the consumers service pipes. Justice
Gould announced that he would not pass
on the exceptions until after January :.
the date on which the justice and the
Washington Gas Light Company are to
show cause before the District Court of
Appeals why a writ of prohibition should
not issue to prevent further proceedings
in that case.
Attorney r. Ross Perry, in the course
of the hearing. informed the court that
while the present application of the COM
pany seeks only to increase the George
town Company's capital stock to 100000,
il is very. probable that an amendment
will be made asking that the issue be
increased to the full value of the plant, as
ascertained by the auditor: The state
ment was made, in response to the court
were deducted would not the valuation
still reach $500, 600.
Mr., Thomas in his argument passed
over the exceptions filed TO the court
Jurisdiction, Justice Gould having again
intimated his determination to stand pat
on his former ruling, and asked leave to
file a brief covering the consumers serv-
ices. He addressed himself particularly
to the definition of the word plant. and
argued that the auditor had made it too
comprehensive.
Alleged to Have Erred.
Mr.. Payne, he said, had erred in not
finding the plant" to be confined to
buildings, foundations and apparatus at
the manufacturing and distributing sta
lions, including gas holders and general
connections at stations. The auditor
should not have placed any valuation.
Mr.. Thomas urged on franchise, good
will, lands and street lighting lamps.
Mr.. Thomas contended that the statute
was unduly favorable to the gas company
and should not be construed literally but
should have such Interpretation as would
make for the benefit OF the general pub
lie and toward the decrease in the price
of gas: He objected to the action Of the
auditor in not requiring at the hearings
on the application that evidence be sub
mitted showing that the proposed IN
crease of stock had been approved by
the company's shareholders. He also
said the auditor s..ould have required the
company to file statement of earnings,
dividends and operating expenses.
Mr.. Dunlop's Argument.
Attorney G. Thomas Dunlop began the
presentation of the company's side of the
controversy this afternoon and was ad-
dressing the court when 1t closed.
Mr. Dunlop urged that the auditors
figures were conservative and that he had
by no means overestimated the value OF
the plant, but had rather deprecated
1t. He claimed that the issue of capital
stock should show the value Of the plant
and business u corporation, just as
mans wealth is estimated by the prop
erty he owns.
Arguments will likely be made by At
torney r. Ross Perry for the company
and by Assistant United States Attorney
Mcnamara for the government. Mr.. Nc
Namara is expected to tell the court that
he is satisfied with the auditors findings.
since 1t eliminates the consumers serv-
Ices, which was particularly attacked by
Mr.. Mcnamara at the hearings.