The evening times. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1906-1914, 1909-03-08
MAI

eeoe~ -
out reference to bonds. because in no
case do the bonds bear six per cent.
interest. But taking. the bonds into
consideration, there Is still not to ex-
ceed three per cent. returns, and
many cases a deficit after considering
all debts and credits, upon the true
valuation for the. state business.
There Is no evidence that any of the
existing bonds were improperly is-
sued either as to amounts or rates
OF interest. In. fixing the value the
court has considered the evidence of
witnesses as to the stocks and bonds
outstanding, and the state board of
taxing purposes has valued these
properties. OF course those findings
are not binding nor conclusive, but
they are persuasive. But independ-
emily of stocks and bonds, and inJe-
pendently of what the state board has.
valued these properties for taxing
purposes. the evidence shows the
valuations to be as recited in the
findings of fact herewith filed, and to
which reference will be made in the
decrees
ut is absolutely necessary that
many trains both passenger and
freight do both local and interstate
business. Even the fast trains stop
ping at but few stations in the state
carry state passengers between such
stations. And the same is true as to
freight trains carrying freight both
in carload and less than carload lots.
ss'Tha valuation 80 $ho
been fixed by the court as shown by
the findings of fact. The entire state
and Interstate earnings of each Of the
roads within the state is known and
fixed to certainty: The expenses
are known and fixed. To apportion
these expenses, must be done accord
ing to one of the two theories, and
the correct theory is that according
to revenue. One theory or other must
be applied to both freight and pas
senger expenses, and the court
should not adopt the. one theory as to
part, and the other theory as to an
other The one theory is helpful to
the one side, and the other theory
helpful to the other side. the one
theory to the one side in freight, and
the other theory to the other side in
passenger. But an arbitrary splitting
of theories is illogical and unfair, and
cannot be recognized: The court has
adopted the revenue theory because
great number of the best railroad
experts of the country, against very
limited number to the contrary have
so testified. Every court has ever had
this question before it in SO far as l
am advised by. the briefs of counsel
and my own independent investiga-
tion has so held in the cases of the
supreme court Of the United States;
in the two cases, by two circuit
judges Of this circuit; by three dis
trict Judges of this court, and by the
supreme court Of Florida, State VS..
Atlantic coast line, And Beale &
Wyman on railroad rates regulation,
announces such as being the correct
rule. The values OF the property
within the state have been fixed by
the court. The entire earnings with
In the state, interstate and state,
freight. passenger and miscellaneous
of each, have been fixed. The entire
expense ts known, including the ex-
ira cost Of each. To ascertain wheth-
er the result is a profit, and If SO,
what per cent, or loss, is but a
problem Of primary arithmetic, as is
shown by Judge Van Devanter in
Arkansas rate cases. There are 9th
er methods equally simple, the re-
sultant figures of course being the
same. These computations show as
to the commodities covered by the
freight rate statute of 1907, that two
roads, the Hannibal & st. Louis, and
the Burlington, allowing nothing for
extra cost, there is deficit, and with
all other companies less than two
per cent: But with the extra cost
added, the deficit for the two COM
panies Is much greater, and the, 9TH
er companies show deficit.
Passenger Earnings.
The passenger earnings under the
two-cent fare law of 1907, allowing
nothing for extra cost over interstate
business. give no return whatever to
the Rock Island. St. Louis & Hanni-
ball, Kansas City, Clinton & SPRING
eld and the Great Western. The 9TH
or companies will have the following:
The st. Louis & San Francisco be-
tween three and four per cent; the
odHIa re between lOur ana nVe per
cent; the Kansas City Southern a
small fraction over two per cent. the
M. K. & T. between two and three per
cent; the Burlington between three
and four per cent. But all this is ar
rived at by allowing no extra cost of
service. But to add the extra cost
for freight and passenger. there are
no earnings over expenses. This is
confiscation under the constitution.
1T being a legislative act. and not
judicial one, this court cannot fix
rates. If it could, two and one-half
cent passenger rates would be fixed
for the stronger roads. and three for
the others. But that is for the leg
islature acting itself with experts,
such as the state employed in these
cases. or through commission with
like assistance"
Judge McPherson also says in the
decision: when the statutes in
question were enacted. it was be-
lieved by many that by reducing the
fare there would be much more
travel. For a month or SO this proved
to be true. But with the novelty