New-York tribune., 1921-09-23
Earnings
Increase in 1920;
r. & L. E. Better
patland Road. Another N. Y.
Central Subsidiary, Fails
q Do SO Well; Contrast
Emphasized i'm Reports

rhe annual reports of three of the
- York Central system lines Ia
80. nuhlic to-day. The corporation
- ssne account. which combines two
smassths OF rental, six months Of guar
as<r Of net income and four months
e; = Independent operation, shows that
4 &. Clsvelsnd. Cincinnati, Chicago e
I I fouls had $S.sS9, ZOO available for
sxsdends in 1920, against SsTs.000
ssss;labIe in 1919; the Pittsburgh q
s.ke Erie had SS,242,nDo, against So
5000 in 1919. and the Rutland had
$4,000 as against S53S.o0o. The Big
rmry paid per cent on it's preferred
..,ock and carried S5,S23,o00 to surplus.
RAP. 4 L. Z. paid 10 per cent on its
.s,tk snd carried S4,e43,000 to surplus.
ssd the Rutland paid no dividends
ns Four's surplus after preferred was
ssaxl to s11.47 share on its common
. ssocx: Pittsburgh & Lake Erie's net
sysilable for dividends is equal to S11.45
share On its S25.9S6,000 capital stock
4 $50 par. and the Rutland net was
a. ssuiyalent to S4.29 share on it's SS,-
1 5000 preferred. There is only $780,
ao common outstanding.
The result Of operation Of the three
.roperties during year OF particu
Il 11fH ttfkuS SOHdiSiOHS 1QF I&llTOa0
ssnasements shows a striking con-
rat and one which Is worth some
I stuay, especially since it involves many
! of The principles and problems that
sre involved in the plan for the con
/ saiidation of railroads under the su-
| nervision of the Interstate Commerce
Commission into a comparatively few
isrge systems. The three roads whose
rsports came out to-day are part of
svstem which includes also the New
York Central itself, the Michirsn
Central and s considerable number of
small roads. The Pittsburgh & Lake
! Erie uses the New York Central svs-
/ teru at its entrance into Pittsburgh,
1 md its business is more in the nature
| Il great industrial switching ward
. thsn Of trunk line. The Big Four is
fiat part Of the New York Central
which covers with a network of lines
4 the territory lying between Cleveland
| St. Louis and Chicago. The Rutland
r;res the New York Central's system
an alternative route via rail and lake
! 10 Chicago.
The Rutland was added to the New
| York Central system to forestall COM
ustiton which consisted, at the time
1 lie Rutland was bought, of drastic
Yste cutting wars. The Big Four was
bought as q competitor of the Pennsyl-
/ ysna lines west, and the Pittsburgh &
! Lake Erie as a competitor of the Penn
sylvania striking at the heart of the
Psnnsylvania's most important source
ei traffic, the Pittsburgh district. 1t
I will be seen that the scheme lying back
i s the building mp Of the New York
4 Central system was much the same
~ 11sI - l.
transportation act for the forming Of
! Interstate Commerce Commission.
| Hutland, and a rich, strong road, the
IPs&L. E., and a highly competitive
| road, the Big Fous, which a few years
ago was weak road, but is now "a
strong one. T
The ratio Of operating expenses to
ssaI operating revenues dealing with
tie actual operation of the property,
nsaTdless of whether the management
vas reporting to the government or to
es private corporation of the Rutland,
nj l03; of the Pittsburgh & Lake
HA s5, and of the Cleveland, Cincin-
| n Chicago & St. Louis. S6. The
nts Of transportation expenses-that
tie cost of fuel, trainmen's wages
Uiether costs of actual train move
aar-was 81 per cent for the Rutland,
&per cent for the P. & L. E. and AS
Mseent for the Big Four. These fig
Es call attention to contrast be-
assn the P. g. L. E. and Big Four.
The fact that the transportation
nao of the P. & l.. E. was 35 and
Is total operating ratio was S5, while
as Big Four's transportation ratio was
Is and its total operating ratio only SO,
suggests that either the Big Four
kimped on maintenance or that the
&sL. E. was abnormally lavish with
It's maintenance. 1t would appear from
other figures in the reports and from
vhst is known Of the physical con-
dition Of the properties that it was the
large expenditures of the P. & l.. e.
and not abnormally small expenditures
Of the Big Four for maintenance that
makes the contrast.
The P. &. l.. E. bore the brunt Of some
of the worst of the pounding that war
TRAFFIC from the Pittsburgh district, COM
thined with government operation, gave
|fhs railroad. Furthermore, it is pretty
Fafs to assume that when the let-up in
adustry came, Immediately following
fhe armistice. the government, with
tiugs railroad deficit rolled up on it's
shands, did not find it expedient to take
Pup deferred maintenance on any of the
railroads serving the Pittsburgh dis
frict. When, therefore, the New York
Central management got the pride of
Pine. system, the 2. & L. E., back, it
probably spent what it considered nee
essary to put the property into good
aape, leaving the legal department to
pght out with the government who was
esponsible and would finally have to
PAY the bill.
ihis assumption is borne out by the
|uetaIled ,rs figures OF operating expenses.
Idhere were substantial increases in
many items. as, for instance, an in
erease OF S34e,000 in expenses of road
WY maintenance (wages of section
saagsl and an increase of $273,0OO in
.ssek laying and surfacing, but beside
so. wee increases the company charged
s.pal,ooo for equalization Of main
~ ne following table shows the princi-
~ ngures for operation of the three
nnspefties, regardless of who operated |
asm' In 1920 and 1919:
tleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago &
st. Louis
Fs.sse mileage oper 2,421 saos |
Pssssrss. revenue ..s6o. s25. .455$5o. roc, orc |
fs;aI ora revenue. 1s,650.f14 17.267, 397 I
xain,a,sSsnn.aung rev.. Ss,862,07S 1886. 456 /
saissesXZaance OF way. 12,003.g33 9.235774 |
fssnie' a OF equip. 20.666.Sss 1855 ,2es I
NansS 90 pshseS.-.... l2J9461 92I4a1 |