Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1914-03-19

scented by us or any other person at
the hearings before the public service
commission, and if in no other way is a
copy of the testimony available I can
furnish a copy for the use of this
board"
Mr.. Bailey-"Pardon me right there,
Mr.. Jones. Do I understand that this
evidence shows the value of the fran
chses of these corporations ?"
Mr. Jones-"I can't say whether
there was any testimony on the sub
ject or not L don't think there was.
AS l say, the hearings were directed
to the value of the property of the
company, and for whatever purpose
this board desires to use that evidence
have no objection, on the part of the
companies, to it's use. / think I made
my position clear at the other hear
ing with reference to the effect of the
decision which has been offered to
you this morning. Now, if I may
speak very briefly, and in "A sense re-
Verse the natural order of my remarks,
l would like to say just word as to
His Excellencys comment concerning
the Passumpsic company and the opin-
ion of the majority Of the public serv-
ice commission as to that company
1t is not my purpose to defend any
public service commission of this
State; whatever l have to say is said
In the interest of the Passumpsic
Telephone company. assume that
the gentlemen who have made decisions
on behalf Of the public service COM
cot
selves; have nothing to say for them.
The transactions which were outlined
in the opinion of the majority of the
public service commission just handed
to your board were openly conducted.
IF you will investigate them you will
! find that they were conducted upon a
proper basis. that there was no excess
sive valuations, that there were no fin
anclal burdens put upon the Passumpsic
company which it could not we'll afford
to assume, that the public has been bene-
fitted by complete telephone service
| in that territory which none Of the pub
lie ever had before. Why in this opin-
ion that matter is referred to, l do not
know. 1t is suggested that the company
cannot now be regulated because great
| financial burdens have been thrown upon
1t by reason of those transactions. BY
| financial burdens must be meant the
. issuing of securities and the assuming OF
debts. Let me point out that in this very
! opinion which is referred to- and in the
very paragraph following the criticism Of
the actions of this company, the present
| ly constituted public service commission
proceeds to predicate the earnings, ex-
| M nd ne hat
upon the financial obligations which were
assumed in those transactions but upon
the value of the property of the company
used and useful in the public service, APP
praised by them at their own valuations
/ What effect can the financial burden OF
that company have upon the questions of
earnings when this very commission does
not base its findings upon one of those
financial obligations but only upon the
actual physical property Of the compan
les used and useful at the present day
in it's business, think no further COM
ment need be made upon that point.
Now. with reference to the valuation
of the property of the New England COM
pany and It's subsidiaries. | desire to say
merely this: That a long series of hear
!ngs before the public service commits
sion these companies presented testimony
under oath The result of that testimony
is to be found tabulated on page rs of the
brief filed by the companies. Whether that
brief has been fled with your commission
or whether It has been open TO any men,
bers of your commission, l do not know
1t Is not my desire to force it upon you
but l will offer, II you care to accept and
look at It for convenience, three copies OF
that brief. The value of that property
of the companies, taking the New Eng
land company first. as 1t appears upon th@
books OF June 80 1913, which is the date OF
the appraisal for taxation, If my memorj
serves-was $2.l02,96l. The result of the
Manson appraisal, which was testified tC
under oath and dates from September
showed for the New England company {
value Of s2,l6s,394.
I'm the case of the Champlain Valley
company the book value was s7s.41s, and
the Manson appraisal showed a valua
ton Of $l24,770. In the case of the Frank
lin County company the book value wa:
sllS'79o and the appraisal showed a valua
ton of s95407. In the case OF tn
Passumpsic Telephone company the bool
value was s4l07s0; the appraisal showed
s5ls'447 In the case of the Vermont Tele
phone e. Telegraph company the bool
value was $780, i29; the appraisal showed
a value of $3O9,O5l There is of course
naturally some variation in each Of thos'
companies. 1t Is not nay purpose here t.
argue In any way whatsoever upon thu
I questions before your board. | anI no
o here for the purpose OF argument; bu