The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1910-08-31
SAYS OUTLOOK FOR
NEXT YEAR NO GOOD
(ContInued from Page One.l

the Kansas city depot, by saying. THE
question OF the Kansas City depot has
nothing 10 do with this general Dropo-
aiti0n."
In tie course OF the hearing the rail-
rOaC introduced a tabulati0n of the in
terest on the stock after the payment
OF bond interest for uae years 1886 10
On cross accumulation, Attorney Joha
II. Atwood OF Kansas city. represent
Ing group OF shippers, took up the
discussion Of some of the exhibits OF
ferod by the railroads and called at
TentiOn 70 an item Of sos goo apprO-
pflated Tor Iuel reserve in 1905 MI
Atwood compared the amount WIFE
much smaller figures for similar
charge in other years.
AIR. Atwood-Let me ask you II this
disposition of funds more than three
times that OF the good year 1909, 10 TINS
fuel reserve, was done because there
was in the mind Of the management the
idea that il would help 10 make this
lean showing 10 be employed as an ar
gument before the commission now
Mr. Ripley do not think II nad
any influence. 1t certainly did not
with me.
President Ripley was questioned con-
corning the capitalization OF the SUB
sidiary lines OF the Santa Fe's system
which. he said. was included IN the
estimate of $4,000 900 that would be
required TO reproduce the systems
properties.
President Ripley declared that he was
unable 10 say whether the santa Fe
makes or loses in the operation or most
of the subsidiary roads.
Auditor on the Stand.
W. r. Bailey. general auditor or the
system. was the next witness ana ne
al once plunged into an array OF tls-
ures showing the increase IN wages
paid by the system now over what was
spent in former years.
Mr.. Bailey declared that by apply
ing the wage scale OF employees in 1901
10 the employees OF the road IN 1910
the system would have saved more
than s6.3OO.0OO, while the actual IN
crease ia the amounts PAID IOr laOor
in 1910 over 1901 was S2l,45O,OOO.
The difference in the figures show
ing the Increase is accounted Tor by
the greatly increased number or en-
plOyes.
Mr. Bailey declared that it would be
practically impossible TO differentiate
between the amounts expended Tor Ia
Dor solely for operating expenses ana
Tor moneys spent for labor expense IN
the betteTmenU of the roadway He
estimated the direct labor charge as
from As to so per cent of the operating
expenses.
When James Peabody Santa F,e
statistician, was called 10 the stand,
Attorney Norton, for the railroad, in
trOduced in evidence a number or tabu-
lations of comparative figures covering
a period OF years.
Some Figures Given.
The statistician declared that from
1893 10 1910, taking 1908 as 100 per
cent. freight earnings decreased TO AZ
per cent and freight operating expenses
increased to 170 per cent. The figures
were for the lines east Of Albuquerque.
Under the head OF necessary eX-
penses for the years 1871 and 1912
Mr.. Peabody declared that the Santa Fe
system would require the expenditure
or 500, 500, 600, the items OF expense in
GLIDING. Terminal Yards. $4,000 goo:
track elevation. $4,000, 600; station
buildings. 81 .5OO, 600, and other eNpen-
ditures in lesser amounts, among which
were listed right Of way and station
ground; grade revision and docks and
wharfs-
liz is said the testimony concerning
the Santa Fe Will be concluded tomOr-
row morning and the Rock Island sys-
TEN is scheduled 10 present its case
Immediately afterward