New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-11-25
DID NOT JUCCLE
FRISCO FIGURES
Speyer & Co. Say Roads
Report Was Incorrect
and Unintelligent.

AGAIN Ntdl tHey "tlc Hh'iSf
resented in the press dispatches from st.
Louis last week reporting details of the
hearing before the Interstate Commerce
Commission on the causes leading up to
the receivership of the St, Louis & San
Francisco Railroad Company, Speyer &
Co. last evening issued a statement rela-
tive to that feature of the testimony that
they had requested the Frisco Ito make
a rearrangement of some Of It's stats
tics"
This request. the bankers explained, was
made in connection with an issue OF prior
lien bonds which the Frisco desired TO
offer On the Berlin Stock Exchange in
1910. The report which the company made
at that time was branded by Speyer &
Co. as not giving a correct and intelligent
statement of the roads financial aifairs'
This is the bankers statement
The company had furnished US at thht
time with a draft Of Il prospectus whlch
was to be submitted to the Berlin Stock
Exchange and German government aH-
thorities, and on examination we FOUND
that this draft did not give correct ana
ineligible statement of the company
financial affairs. We found.
"First-That the company had in this
draft overstated its liabilities by men
tioning on the liability side 100000 notes
which II had outstanding, and also SlO.-
900 600 of it's New Orleans Division bonds
which were deposited as security Tor
these same notes.
"Second-The next item to which we
objected was the inclusion In the item
notes payable of s3,063,6& u due 10
Brownsville syndicate account balance
purchase price of Brownsville road We
had repeatedly been Informed by the
company that there was nothing due by
the Frisco in this connection, because
the debt OF the Frisco for the purchase
Of the Brownsville line had been dis
charged by payment in bonds We IN
sisted that this transaction should be
carried out az promised and the note or
floating debt was lquidated by an actual
sale Of bonds.
"Third-We also found that the company
stated that the cash on hand on June O'
1909. was $51O6,35i 90, while in the annual
report for l90S-09 the same amount was
shown to be $,52O,9Sl 73. We asked for an
explanation of the apparent discrepancy
and insisted that the explanation should
also be given I'm the company's regular re-
mort. or parallel columns be printed to en-
Fable proper comparisons
"Fourth-We also claimed that in re-
porting earnings monthly TO the public the
company should include the mileage ana
earnings Of the New Orleans, Texas q
Mexico Division which at that time were
unfavorable. and that excluding them
would be misleading,
The company admitted the justice Oh
our criticism and Of our demands ana
made the changes accordingly. These
changes were i'm effect a good deal more
than a mere Encouragement of status
tics to make better appearance. Inc
propriety of our position In this matter
and our purpose in asking Tor these
changes surely canIpt be questioned by
any fair-minded person
G. W. Hnlard, vice-president OF the
Frisco and the New York financial rep
rcsentative of the receivers, who was
witness at the ST. Louis hearing, also an
solved Speyer & Co from any culpapiilty
I'm connection with the changes made III
the companys report mentioned above.
Mr.. Hilard also stated that the names OF
R,air a Co. OF this city, and the Old Col
ony Trust Company, Of Boston, should not
have been mentioned in connection with
the financing of the Gulf CONSTRUCTION
Company by b. T.. Yoakum.
Mr.. Hilard charged that the examiners
of the Interstate Commerce Commission
had not given him an opportunity OF eX-
planning in detail the Frisco dealings.
Referring to the prospectus which was
prepared for the Berlin Stock Exchange
and the changes suggested by Speyer AZ
Co. he said
This prospectus was enormously re-
ferred to at the hearing as an annual re-
port' / tried TO explain. and had got far
enough to say that their action was en-
tirely proper, when | was Immediately
stopped by the examiner He replied, 1
did not ask whether IL was proper; that
is not the question Instead OF being a
subject for criticism. their action in this
matter was distinctly creditable."