The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram., 1914-03-26

pOyeQ Dy LHc COHlpdHy, Is SIlOWH ny IIIc UTlcl uO
have fixed on total valuation of SLOT ,806.
The attorneys for the company have arrived at
an approximate valuation for rate making pur-
poses by averaging these various valuations.
The two chief points at issue between the city
attorney and the Water Works Company are the
question as to whether the company should be al
lowed to include in it's valuation the cost of serv-
ice connections, and the question Of "Going
Value"
The company, according to it's Rules and Reg
uations, has laid it's mains to the curb From this
point the private consumer has paid for the con-
nections which carry water into the house. Ac-
cording to Rule No. 18 of the Rules and Regula-
tions of the company, the private consumer in
having these connections made, entered into
contract whereby they were to become the PROP
erty of and be kept in repair by the Richmond
City Water Works.
The companys attorneys argue that in COM
plying with this contract, private consumers
made to the Richmond City Water Works
these service connections. And since these con-
nections have tangible value, they declare this
valuation should be included in the total vaua-
tion of the plant for rate making purposes.
The question of "Going Value" is a more cru
dte one and difficult for the layman to under
stand. The company's attorneys in the brief
argue that there are two ingredients in "GOng
Value': first, the losses incurred in the initial
years of the plants existence and, second in the
value represented by the good management of
the plant at the present time. They hold that the
brains" necessary to keep the plant in it's pres
ent used and useful condition" as much
necessary part of successful water works plant
as the machinery itself and declare this repre-
sents at least fifteen per cent of the value of the
plant and should be included in the total vaua-
tlon for rate making purposes.
These two issues lie in the hands of the
public service commission. That body is the court
of final jurisdiction and has power to decide
whether Mr. Watts valuation of $598,678 or the
companys valuation of 100000 will be accepted
the basis for fixing rates.
If the cOmpany's valuation is accepted, there
seems to be other alternative than that water
rates will be increased, providing the commission
allows seven per cent a reasonable rate on the
investment.
In at least two paragraphs, the water works
company's attorneys have inclined to rather sar-
castle comments on Progressivism. They aver
that they have respect for the opinion of the
city attorney because "it is founded on nothing
but the Bull Moose tendency to rise above the
Constitution and the law
Why four attorneys of repute and standing
should in arguing like this, step out of the
way to give vent to personal prejudice it is diff
ficult to understand. Whether Mr. Bond is a
Bull Moose or not is entirely irrelevant The
case is whether or no the company is to be al
lowed valuation of $4,000 How the public
service commission will decide on that point is
awaited with considerable interest by the several
thousand citizens of Richmond whose pocket
books seem destined to be affected one way or
another by their decision.