Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1919-09-13
Commissioner Gardiner, in
Dissenting Opinion, Deals
With Legal Aspects.
HIS COST BASIS WOULD
ADD MILLIONS TO WORTH
States That He Realizes Response
bility and Makes His Decision
Fearless of Criticism.

Predicting financial disaster for the
company and retarding of Washing
tons growth If the findings of his col
leagues are sustained, Commissioner
w. Gwynn Gardiner. in a twenty-four-
page typewriter opinion. today re-
vealed his reasons for disagreeing
with the majority members of the
Public Utilities Commission in their
finding of fair value for the proper
ties of the Washington Railway and
Electric Company.
The Commissioner goes into the
case at length. resting his arguments
almost solely upon United States Su-
preme Court decisions.
He avoids figures. combining the re-
port to a discussion of legal prin-
several million dollars, it is estimated.
to the valuation of $16,106,36S.14 as
found by the majority members, Com
missioners kutz and Brownlow.
Il am not unmindful of the fact" he
states, in concluding the report. that
much criticism from certain sources
which will be heaped upon me by
reason of my dissenting opinion in
this and the other street railway case
Capital Traction Company would
have been spared me had 1 agreed
with my associates views or dissent
ed without expressing my reasons for
so doing.
81 believe it to be the duty of the
commission to form their opinion in
every respect. SO that the courts can
look into and analyZe the various
problems involved-to correct. amend
or affirm them. This the courts can
not do if the commission does not let
it be known what consideration 1t
gives and what it's findings are upon
every question in dispute.
Recognizes Great Responsibility.
when considering this question
from it's many and different angles, l
have at all times recognized the great
responsibility that rested upon me
and the other members of the COM
mission In disposing> of this case. 1
am convinced that if the majority
opinion in this case rs sustained by
the court. ruin will result 70 these
roads. the value Of which we are en-
deayoring to ascertain, and that ii
that thing is done which results in
the destruction of these properties, it
must at the same time result in a
very serious setback, if not into a
lasting retarding of the growth and
development of this. our National
Capital.
1.-The reasons that prompted me in
expressing myself in such decided
way as l have done in this case must
have been the same as those passing
through the mind of our distinguished
ex-President when he said:
But a public officer. when he con-
ceives it his duty to take affirmative
action in the public interest. has no
more right to allow fear of unjust
criticism and attack to hinder him
from taking that action than he
would allow personal and dishonest
motives to affect him. 1t is easy in
cases like this to take the course
which timidity prompts. and to /. do
nothing, but such a course does not
inure to the public veal
II feel as he feels on this subject,
and I have done that thing which I
believe to have been my absolute
duty"
Disagrees With Associates.
AS in his minority report in the
Capital Traction Company valuation
case. Mr.. Gardiner dissents from the
findings of his associates as to the
date of valuation. July 1. 1914.
He then reviews the development Of
the company as effected under the ex-
press authority of Congress and sets
ing that transactions which have been
ratified by Congress can be set aside
years afterward.
Concerning the method of the ma
jority members for arriving at fair
value by starting with a valuation as
of July 1. 1914, and adding thereto all
proper capital expenditures incurred
since that date, Mr.. Gardiner says, in
part:
"By the terms of the latter para
graph paragraph 9 of the public
utilities act) it will be seen that the
revaluation of the property of this
company may be had by the commits
sion at any time, and therefore surely
Congress did not intend that this COM
mission should begin on November s,
1915 a. hearing in this case for the
purpose of arriving at the value of the
property, which did not end until Sep
TENDER, 1919, and date back it's find
ings in effect as Of June 80, 1914, while
at the same time fix a rate of return
to the company for the present time
and under present conditions, which
does not represent the fair value of
the properties at the present time
under present conditions.
Considers Permanent Cost.
1T do not wish to be understood as
saving that believe that the COM
pany's property should be valued at
the current prices of labor and mate
rial. which must be somewhat abnor-
NAL. I do believe, however. that we
should determine as of today what the
fair value of this property is. taking
as n basis what we find will be a fair,
permanent basic cost of reproducing
the property and not fix it's fair value
as of an arbitrary date, adding there
to such capital expenditures as have
been made since that date.
IT am entirely satisfied that the
commission had a right to have all
their calculations made as of July /.
1914. provided they added thereto not
only what had been expended by the
railroad by way of capital expenditure
since said date, but they should have
added also the reasonable percentage
of increase which the present day
clearly shows is necessary in order to
give us the value of the property as
Of TODAY rather than of 1914.
"My associates. having found that
there is an increase since 1914-a per-
| manent, lasting increase-it is the
duty of the commission to ascertain
what percentage OF increase would be
| a fair one and add that to the value
| found as of 1914 plus capital expendi-
lures since 1914 in order to make the
proper and fair value.
IT find that the Supreme Court has
spoken upon this subject, favoring
such . contention. in language SO
1