The Washburn leader. [volume] (Washburn, McLean County, N.D.) 1890-1986, 1913-09-26

the United States, which rendered
a decision April 10, 1910, sustain
ing the North Dakota court, but
leaving the matter open until
such times as the railroad COM
panies had tried the rates. If,
after reasonable experiment, it
were found to be unsatisfactory
they might reopen the case for
further consideration by the court
This was accordingly done in
July, 1911. A proper referee was
designated by the court'to take
testimony. The hearings were
held in the twin cities, the state
Iof North Dakota being represent
ed by Attorney Miller and As
istant Attorney General Young !;
the raildroad commission, largely
through Chairman Stutsman and
Rate Expert Little, assisted at
Rate Expert Little, assisted at
these hearings; the state secured
Mr.. Hillman as rate expert. Mr..
Hillman is one of the best known
rate experts in the United States
and has testified in nine out of
ten of the various cases which
have found their way in the
state and the United States Courts
This expert made an exhaustive
examination of the books
of the various railroad
companies and his conclusion
the case at various hearings in
st. Paul, as well as the conten-
tions of the experts of the rail
road companies. Saturday the at
torneys Of the three roads, as
we'll as Attorney General Miller
and his ex-assistant, Mr.. Young,
presented evidence to the court,
together with argumnets on the
legal points involved. Mr.. Donnel
ly, representing the Northern Pa
cific railroad, made the first argu-
ment to the court on behalf of
the carriers. He explained that
the Northern Pacific had COM
piled figures for the fiscal year
ending June 1, 1911, covering the
intrastate coal traffic. The North.
ern Pacific handled 4,412 cars OF
coal during that time for which
they received in round numbers
about $4,000.
The operating cost and taxes ac-
eording to Mr.. Donelly announced
!! for that period to approximately
1861 900, making a total deficit of
about $2,25O. The operating cost
WAS $58, 1920; the tax levied on
the property of the Northern Pa
cific Railroad Co. in North Da-
kota amounts to about Al per
cent on their gross income. This
would make their tax on the lig-
mite coal business approximately
$2,24O.
This being true Mr.. Donnelly az
gued that the rate as fixed by
the 1907 statute was unreasonabl..
low and confiscatory. He contend
ed! that the. cost of transporting
Ignite was greater than the cost
Of transporting ordinary freight,
owing to the nature of the coal
and the fact that the heavy traffic
occurred largely in the winter
when the cost Of operating was
greatly in excess ofsthe cost dur
ing the remainder Of the year.
4 He pointed ont that Mr.. Little,
one Of the states experts, used
a different system in arriving at
the operating cost and that his
figures showed a profit of ap-
proximately 5000 on the lignite
business done by the Northern hs
cific in North Dakota. Mr.. Hill
man, the other state expert, foun
that the profits are about 81 600;
he therefore argued that the
three cumputatiors of the cose OF
operating expenses, chargeable to
the Ignite coal traffic in North
Dakota, were SO nearly alike IN
Their conclusions that the count
would be justified in holding thai
the Ignite coal traffic did not
contribute toward the net profits
of the carrier.
I He contended that the decision
of the court at the former hearing
Of this ccse was erroneous in
that it held that SO long as the
schedule Of freight rates returned
q reasonable profit to the carrier
no one commodity could be sing
led out as having been carried at
ia loss by the corporation. He con.
tended that each and every cons
modify must not only pay its just
share Of the operating expenses
Of the railroad, but that u must
show q net at. He conceded