The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1916-06-16
w tines sses Squirm
When Put On Grill
BY Hal Smith
JAMES F. LAND
is EVASIVE
Further Discrepancies
In Appraisal Fig
ures Shown

FAtNSih hty tihA H. Siultu1 ItpItStHt-
Ing the board OF Commerce, in the
telephone rate hearing before the
state railroad commission in the
city hall, Friday morning. placed two
OF the telephone company's expert
witnesses on the grill and made
them squirm.
He went after James +. Land, for
merly with the Detroit Telephons
Co., and threatened 10 impeach
Lands testimony In support of tho
telephone appraisal made by w. J..
HaRanah.
Didn't you approach Harry J..
Dingeman when he was a member Of
the common council and suggest
that the city put in an automatic
telephone system?" Attorney Smith
arked Land. who replied in the az
frmative.
What did you say about the tele-
phone company's nroperty them"
Il don't tf,nk that applies In this
instance" was Lands eyaSive an
swer.
Attorney Smith then went on to
recite that two years ago Mr.. Land
said the telephone company's prop
erty was antiquated and mostly
junk.
II am asking the witness about
this because propose TO impeach
his testimony" stated Attorney
Smith directly TO Lawton T. He
mans. chairman of the commission
Land denied that he made any
statement about the telephone com
pany's property.
You wrote out statement TO be
Presented 10 the council. didn't
you?" Smith insisted.
81 don't recall IT,"
Didn't you express an opinion
them"
Il did" admitted Land. ITO the ef-
feet that the efficiency OF the com.
pany was not good. did refer TO
some wires as being old. but don't
recall where they were located"
Thomas F. Ahearn, who made a
valuation OF the telephone com
pany's property in 1911 for p. J. NJ.
Hally. then corporation counsel. was
next cross.examined by Attorney
Smith. Ahearn also had previously
testified TO the correctness of the
Haganah appraisal.
Assuming that We have a tele-
phone system OF 5000 phones this
year and II increases TO 10000 next
year. what is the relation OF the
larger to the smaller SYSTEM" ask
ed Attorney Smith.
About so per cent"
'1n 1911 you made a valuation for
Hally, in which you figured the re-
production value on a 56.000-'phone
system. less depreciation, at s4,7s3,
000." continued Smith. How do
you reconcile your figures with the
Haganah appraisal OF $4,000. 900. the
correctness OF which you have testi-
fed to-"
Ahearn explained that he had been
called in at the eleventh hour by
Hally and that he had made his val
uation by casual observation"
Attorney Smith then read from a
letter I'm which Ahearn was quoted
as saying that he determined his es-
innate OF the telephone company's
property by methods approaching a
physical valuation. adding that the
estimate was substantially correct
and could be used as basis for a
change In rates.
Ahearn tried to defend his figures
by stating that II the cost OF estab.
fishing the business were added. the
total would be materially larger.
"All right" agreed Attorney
Smith. 1--WE will add sl,b00.000 for
the establishment OF the business,
and sl,500,000 more for land and
buildings, according to the figures in
Mr.. Haganah's appraisal. That will
bring your total up to s7.500,00
Ahearn left the witness stand in
a hun. declaring that II his testi-
mony was to go into the record. he
wanted an opportunity to sustain
the correctness OF his figures. pre-
pared more than two years ago.
Charles l.. Zahm, formerly en-
ployed by the city as telephone ex-