The Washington times., 1910-04-13

any servant Of the company iu its
i regular employment. or TO the concfu-
{ whose services could have been made
use Of by the company under the cir
: cUmstanCes-f0r TWO reasons. UJ- be-
cause thee was not time enough for
any other engineer or sci of engineers
+ TO make a complete appraisement before
the adjournment OF Congress and %
because DR.. Humphreys Is personally
wei known TO several members OF the
/ committee and has been certified to
every member upon 1t, in a previous
INVESTIGATION By gent emen whose in
! judgment In regard TO the same cannot
! b} any possibility be questioned or de-
MED by anybody anywhere
] Now. in proof OF this broad assertion
/ ] DCS 10 refer the committee 10 the
/ testimony or MIR Madden. recorded I'm Il
/ hearing on his bin, known as the Mad
I den bIl hearing tH. r. pa 1907. PAGE
/ I'D, IN which he jUstifies the selection
! OF Dr. Humphreys for a member OF a
/ board which was established in the city
! Of chicago. through Mr.. Madden-S in
4 >trG'nentalitN, TO regulate the prices 10
I De CHARGED the people OF that CITY by
/ Tie Chicago Gas Company. Mr.. Mad
den says
/ Mr. Alexander Humphrey am quot
! ans from The record-tEe head or a great
: Nrhcgi- president OF the celebrated Stcv-
/ ems institute and the Leading consult
I ING engineer OF America and Europe on
! the subject Of the manufacture and dis
4 tIl5EuOn Of Sas. was selected as one
{ VINO 1cIld present the subject from a
. wholly impartial standpoint as 4 great
! engineer.
= I am quite confident. Mr. Chairman
! tiiat those OF you who appreciate the
{ great abilities Of MT. Madden and the
( distinguished service he has rendered
. tile people Of his own city IN this con
{ necuon, and the deep interest he has
taheh IN me subject here viii agree
2 with me that IL would be difficult 10
state in language more uneuuivoCaI a
AtEner ceTuhcation than this 20 the
ability OF the witness his mastery Gf
: the subject. and his imDartiaIitv in
( eiUcldaJing II. all OF which have been so
unTnlst bly, displayed I'm the course OF
MS two days testimony before this
{ committee
But this is not aI- on page thirty-tUro
OF the same report ] find Mr. Edward
y BeemlS VINO u UnQUestiOnably one of
/ the ehleSt and best known Of the So
called anti-gas experts. qualifying DR.
humphreys as follows
{ | accept the standard established by
AleTande- G. Humphreys. the best
alJhorlly / Know Or IN the gas world.
But II the committee please 10 has
never been my purpose to rest our case
. upon the testimony OF Dr.. Humphreys
alone The American Audit COMPANY
has verified his report. and there is
6 abundance or testimony which viii be
/ produced should you think II necessary,
( 10 confirm his statements.
/ I have only 20 add that 7 am i'm
& Cliued 10 think YOU viii not want ar
great array of evidence as to the actgaI
-
. when YOU come TO realize the fact. that
! conceded al the first hearing. on De
half or she company that large part
OF the present capita izaIion was de-
( rived from the profits permanently IN
vested In plant, and Il IS difficult to-
understand why the case should be de-
{ laNed by efforts 20 prove what the com
paulcS are WliinE I9I the sake OF the
argument to conceGe- II may serve.
however, TO narrow the controversy 20
the real points AZ issue further, to say
e.
. the rates are concerned. We could also
"a feIy SGmIr Tor the sake or argument.
that Tie stockholders Of the -CUUpa Mes
never al any time put dollar of rnel-
point Of fact, the company does not and
never has owned any part or the prop
errE employed in the conduct OF its BUS
mess II being well settled law that the
sole criterion in 4 rate case - the val
ne Of the property employed, lr-espec-
tive of IFS ownership. or Tue manner i1
( which title 10 u was acquired.
7 The second animadrerslon 20 when
y beg leave 90 be permitted now 10
respond was embodied n . quesJ ION
put 10 the witness upon lAe $LaliH
ftDr- Humphrey 10 this effect W ny
IS IL that the companies here on Iri5 .
are so extensivel! advertising TINS
The question fIai1Iy and frankly
put deserves an CTCaliv plain ana
1T is a matter Of common knowledge.
Mr. Chairman that Up 10 the time OF
.tHe paSsa Ee of the act requiring the
lighting companies TO ma Ike aunua
statements to Congress the Compa-
MES / have the honor 10 Teprese q
here were more or less severely crit
Ci.sd- from time 10 time, because OF
their failure 10 take the punflc INT
.rEeir confidence The inquiry was
y-yviCe-why- are the people kept IN
Ignorance OF the merits % matte =
and things in which thew are 50 vital
fI- interested2 Personally. 7 was very
EIad, indeed when Congress thouEht
proper 10 accurate define what l.
was that il desired or required 10 De
annually made known 10 all con-
cerned In the premises
r was gTatified. because believed then
a. now. that II would lead 70 better
/ understanding between the companies
and the people IS well as between the
companies and the great committees
who are charged with their legal regu-
lauOn. So when q. question arose tas
III did A year ago. OF vital interest 10
the public. Of which the Commission
E erS thought II necessary 70 officially
take COgnizauCe. the companies deter
mined that il would be to their interest
? and 10 the public interest (Which IN the
+ last ana lyStS are one} 20 have the pro-
ccediHgs fairly reported, at the com
= pa1F expense IN the daily newspaper
2 OF Washington 50 that not only those
who were present at the sessions (al-
s WAYS a limited number, but everybody
} else in the city might thoroughly under
sand the merits Qf the caSe-just what
II was the committee proposed TO do.
I why II proposed TO do IL. and how II
- was to be done The question that was
ltHen under consideration was the pro
. prieJy Of prohibiting the gas companies
from making water gas or other gas
containing more than 10 per cent Of
. what is known as carbon mouOEide.
a ne Washington Gas Light Company
IexeTted itself upon that occasion 70
hiring 10 this city gentlemen eminently
distinguished as gas engineers to testify
before the committee as 10 the inUmin-
. atinC value OF mater gas relative "a
coal gas. az to the Injurious character
Of mouoNide (which water gas inyaria-
bly, earliest as 10 the relative merits
OF water gas and coal gas and as II
II --.e proper methods of safeguarding the
public from whatever danger sleTe
might be in the use Of the mixed gas
the company vas then making
. Perhaps Z should further say IN JUS
Jice TO the company, that IL took the
position then. as now. that it was Will
3 ing. as IL always had been willing at all
, times IN its previous history. 10 abide
. hy the decision OF Congress. whatever
ii might be- and To Immediately pro-
coed II Congress thought Il wise 10 dc
SO. 10 the erection Of a modern cogl
r gas plant. 20 comply with its wishes
= The result of the course pursued by
b. the company in publishing that test
p mony (Which, as IN this case. necessarily