The Washington times., 1919-04-01
STREET CAR
HEADS PLAN
FINISH FIGHT
Controversy Over Property VAL
uatioPs Sure to Be Carried to
United States Supreme Court
ny BILL PRICE.

ny BILL PRICE.
The valuations OF the street rail-
way properties OF the District. soon
70 be made by the Public Utilities
Commission, are sure to be contested
through TO the United States Supreme
Court; not anly as TO the accuracy Of
the figures found by the commission.
but upon q number Of questions OF
TACT and law comparatively new In
the courts OF the country.
Attorneys for the Capital Traction
Company, in concluding their argu-
ment some days ago upon data be-
fore the commission, strongly intI
mated that the processes that IhAd
oeen used by the commission in seek
ing the worth OF the properties might
have TO be tested in the courts.
The attorneys for the Washington
Railway and Electric Company, nov
arguing before the commission on
valuation data collected by the enEi-
neers OF that company and the COM
mission, attack the methods OF eX-
perts Of the commission in such a
way as to leave little doubt Of their
purpose to go to the highest courts
as q last resort
The differences between the experts
OF the commission and OF the Capital
Tiaction Company az to the worth OF
that property were not near so far
apart as In the case OF the Washing
ton Railway and Electric Company.
Clash On Appraisal Dates.
In the cases OF both street railway
companies, however, the estimates OF
the engineers were made as Of q
number Of years ago, while the claim
IL made that the ascertainment of
worth should be as OF the present
nRfa wnREfnR a Crnaf nfnaranNa hn-
cause OF changes in costs Of materials
and labor at this time and the time
the experts presented their testi-
mony.
The point is illustrated in the his
torical costs arrived at Andrew
Sangster, who worked for the COM
Faission under DR.. Beamis, the expert
employed by the commission, hxed
June 80 1914, as the date for his
historical valuation Of S9.961 ,s29,
while Frank J. Nelson. for the COM
pany, found that the historical cost
lad been over $50, ,0OO, 900, with the
date OF HIS hnding July /, 1916
The reproduction costs were also Of
,Aifferent dates. Charles L. Pillsbury,
for the commission, found that the
W. r. & E. would cost to reproduce
q total Of S12,75s,250, and he ccm-
Pieted his valuations about Decem-
Ser l, 1915, For the company, Harold
Almert completed his estimates in
1917. and gave his estimate OF repro
Suction valuation at close to
$50, 900, 900. He figures that II would
nave cost that much to reproduce
Suly ], 1916.
Syme Would Figure on Outlay.
Conrad Syrne. counsel for the COM
mission, takes the position that for
Fhe purpose of rate making the
amount Of the original investment,
svhen IL can be ascertained, is the
proper subject of the inquiry and not
the value Of the properties at this
time. Not being able to fully ascer-
tain this from the books of the
washington Railway and Electric,
Mr.. Syme wants the valuation made
by using both historical and repro
ductIon figures in a sensible way.
He opposes the view Of the attor-
news for the railroads that the valu-
atoms should be made as Of the time
~ the inquiry; that is, that the
roads should be allowed what their
rroperties are worth today IL they
had TO be replaced. Based upon pres
ent-dav prices. the valuations Of
these properties would go far beyond
what the commission will allow.
Attorneys for the Washington Rail-
wav and Electric bear strongly on
the claim that the capitalization Of
that company June 80, 1916, was
Ss1 1.47l ,35i, issued under authority OF
congress in the act Of June ., 1900;
fbat Congress carefully Investigated
aTY the facts before authorizing the
-,erRer Of the then existing railway
tines and the taking over by the com
Danv Of the Potomac Electric Light
and Power Company.
within Law, Is Claim.
RepIyinE to inquiries limiting at
trnproper manipulation OF stocks In
the early days Of the company ana
ere infection OF much "water' the
Sompany's counsel answer that there
a. no evidence before the commission
- this and that the organization
tbroUrhout il authorized by law.
with the roads contendinE That
,rssent value should rule with the
.onnission and not historical or re-
r-oSUction value. as contended for by
EounseI Syrne, a long contest in the
courts is assured.
Counsel for the washington Railway
sn6 Electric Company are attacking
~ 2 w Beamish and his assistants,
5IIIsbury and Sangster, as belonging
90 a "Fchool Of political economists,
theorists, and propaganoists having
little following among engineers.
Tsounssl for the commission charges
.bat Engineers Almert and Nelson,
ITrpIoyed by the company, are en-
.,Ineers who have nearly always been
rstained by corporations, and as such
rpe in sympathy with the corpora