The Washington times., 1916-12-15
W. F. HAM DISPUTES
UTILITIES FIGURES
Head of Electric Power Co. De-
MES Authenticity Of Utilities
Body's Valuation.
CONTINUED from First Page3

CONTINUED from First Page)
| and Rhode Island avenue in 1881,
which he characterized as unsuccess.
He then referred to the organiza.
| ton of the Kreisler Electric Light
! Company by Stilson Hutchins In 1881
| and OF the gradual enlargement from
this company to the present plant.
The history of tho Potomac com
pany, with its various qualifications,
was gone into thoroughly, and all OF
the various changes in tho character
OF the company were cited.
Capital 4. sio.0Oo.ooo.
The present. capital OF the oPtomac
company is $4,000, 900, said Mr.. Ham
The outstanding stock consists Of
$500 shaees OF preferred stock and
81 800 shares of common stock. All
this Is held by the Washington Rail
way and Electric Company, and Is
| pledged to the United states Mort
gage and Trust Company as security
for a mortgage.
, The outstanding bonds of the com.
pany include S1,700,000 first mortgage
of the Commercial Trust Company
OF New Jersey and $5,3OOOO0 In con.
solidated mortgage bonds Issued
June 30,1916, In favor OF the same
AZ the conclusion OF his historical
statement; Mr. Ham SAID nc had care,
fully read and studied the report or
Chiet accountant AndreW ShnssasI
sidered the methods by which Mr..
Sangstcr arrived at his conclusions,
to be entirely wrong.
Explain. Reasons.
"In what way do you consider these
methods wrong" asked s. X. Bowen.
pnunsei for the COmDuny
81 consider them wrong" replied the
u,I,ncs..
"First because Mr.. Sangstcr excluded
all costs but physical costs.
'Second. because he eliminated all
costs that have 10 do with the develop
ment OF the property.
Third. in limiting his studies OF the
cost, to The physical properues 49,.
personal knowledge with the affairs
of the Potomac Electric Power Com
nany' coneIuded the witness, Pc
sot &c I'm, I . md i.ods 70 wroD9
re.,,its % "'
Dl0ersut Ide..
the DOCKS OF the fotoinhc company
ho continued. were not originally kept
I with any such idea In View as To OBJ
tain tho exIs,Inp costs and A. a.
,r,., ,r,aas.I,,. g. I,.i, -
'"P''''o w '"'"'" 'uS"
'S.e , T., ..,.a A.. A., a..
~, ~ t.', 'na' :" wy
s..e' v, N"'u.s, nu." ~
.sta,, ' "s 's' ,
cns, :, ., pos trone 10 ,hs Soows n,,t
I'm ,bs ,aa,sr of naiea cobi"s con.
QUITS and lnstsiIations that embrace
very large ehsrneter OF work ana ana
very ia,se hHlount oI coSt " " my
possible because OF frequent renew s
,hcrefore imnossIhIe 10 ohtain eNact
costs
20 hot uhueIstahui ~ tne Ia
adon,ed nv the intaystate Commerce
Commission" said Mr.. Ham. shat
| this classification contemplatess any
accounts or groups In which costs
| OF existing property are 10 be stated.
&C.. u....s., F.,s
'"-S -. =
"I wish II TO be clearly understood,
boweveru Mr. Ham statsd with em.
49,, eel, nm 'n,. accounts, -.
P"as's' ''a, ""''o o"'
not Kept with view OF aseertalning
these costs ana whlie beHevo ~
would Do Impossible 10 state them
TIL sis not because the costs are not
recorded, They are recorded, but not
In such away as TO clearly state them
all, and | do not believe they can be
analysed In this method.
81 consider the Sangster report alb
solutely tmpracticable. He should
have first made made an inventory