The Washington times., 1917-01-29
HEAR ARGUMENTS
ON VALUATION DATE
Pepco Attorney Urges Finding
of Value for the
Year 1916.
Continued from First Psge.)


upon to furnish copper to the world
for the next decade.
should Consider ChanEed vaIne.
Suppose. for example. the Potomac
Electric Power Company in 1914 bought
1000 tons Of copper. The question TO be
determined by the commission in fixing
valuations. Ii not what the article cost,
but its fair worth. What this commits
sion II compelled TO do is to ascertain
It's value"
Al this point Mr.. Douglas was inter-
rupted by Commissioner Newman who
asked II he had found any valuations
Of the properties OF utilities where the
chief element considered was the cost Of
reproduction. His answer was in the
affirmative.
Suppose copper had gone down in
stead OF increased In value" asked
Commissioner Kutx. what effect
would you say II should have upon
valuation and the rate ouestionT'
Skew to the Line,D He Says.
1T should be treated in the same
way" said Mr.. Douglas. at il your
duty to hew to the line and let the
chips fail upon US or the community"
kouppObG lIldl IIlc CObl VI an al NtOAO
should increase between 1914 and 1915
100 per cent, would the company be
entitled In consideration of the val
uations of its properties to an In
creased value with which II had moth
ing to do with creatingT inquired
Conrad II. Syme, general counsel for
commission.
certainly" responded Mr.. Douglas.
at real estate owned by Mr.. Syme
should increase in value 200 per cent
in two years, would not the added
value be Mr.. syme's?
Claims Rights to Benefits.
Asked by Commissioner Newman.
whether In his opinion a corporation
should be entitled. morally and aside
from q legal standpoint, to such bene-
fits, Mr.. Douglas said that the haE-
ards OF utilities were such that when
they were compelled to take the
chance of loss, they should be en-
titled corresponding benefits Of such
an increase.
Turning to what he held should be
Included In the valuations Mr.. Dou-
glas said they should embraces prop
erty which has been used or may be
used In the reasonably near future.
/ Inc company hC BaAas a01 o~AAsANe -
power site at Great Falls. costing az
proximatsiy 81, 000, 900, which II not
included in the valuations made BY
Charles l. Pillsbury, chief accountant
of the valuation bureau.
when the company needs 100000
Horsepower 1t 10 its Intention to utii-
lie this plant" he said. To say that
such property shall not be valued
penalties the wisdom and foresight OF
the company"
Such property. he argued should be
included in the valuations even
though II Is not within the District.
the intention of Congress being that
the valuation should include all the
properties of the company, whether
located in the District or adjoining
States.
Claims Property Rights.
Mr.. Douglas contended that a gen.
eraI franchise may not be a property
right, but that a special franchise and
easements do constitute such rights.
Such rights. he said. as those OF the
Potomac Electric Power Company In
having its mains placed under streets,
its wiring above ground, and its con-
nections with $4,000 or $4,000 homes,
not only were designated as property
rights but as real property rights
everywhere in law.
He cited a case in Maryland, which
he said was a landmark decision on
this point, in which It was held that.
| for taxation purposes, easements
should be considered as property, ana
that. in this particular case tie only
reason for not taxing special iran
chises as we'll was because the tax2-
ton on gross earnings represented q
tax on these special franchies.
Cites Local Decisions.
Local courts have held, he said
that franchise rights of corporations
in streets could be taxed. along with
owners Of AUDITING property even
though the corporations had not
taken advantage OF these rights oy
their use.
"People VS.. O'Brien," which, ne sara,
had heen widely quoted, In which II
wss held that the right to use streets
was- in every sense, a property right
We cited similar decisions from other
state tribunals.
Items Claimed By Company.
Attorneys for the company submit
ted a brief showing the cost OF ply
steal property found by Harold Al
inert, the company's expert, and moi
included in the Pihsbury report.
Following are the items: Benning
extension, $500, 900; addition to offce
building, SIO3.4 61; dwellings, $2,lso;
pump and freight house, $o,434; Great
Fails Power Company. 100000:
Graceland Cemetery, 1927, 466.