Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-09-02

the years ending June 80. 1921; Dec 81,
1921; June 30. 1922, and Dec 81. 1922
For the year ending June 80, 1927, the
statement gives net earnings as S1,425,-
oo7.53; depreciation, $SS0,00o; fixed
charges. 81, o3S 100; miscellaneous, SIS, 900,
leaving a deficit of 48,092.47
For the year ending Dec. 81, 1921. the
statement gives net earnings, 1850 ,641
depreciation, $3.50 900; fixed charges. ST.
o45 5000; miscellaneous $65,0oo, surplus
S1O6041.
For the year ending June 80. 1922, the
estimate IS. net earnings, S1,702 800; de-
probation, $3.50, 600; fixed charges, $1,o0S,.
100; miscellaneous. $4,000 surplus $l7s..
400.
For the year ending Dec. 81, 1922, the
calculations are: Net earnings, S1,S4S,-
$50; depreciation, 100000; fixed charges,
$1,07o,600; miscellaneous, 100000; SUR
plus, $2s7, $3.50.
The increase in business as indicated
in these statements. 1t is stated, Ia
brought about by the addition of 81 per
cent as the annual increase to be Ak
pected in the business OF the electrical
plants, 5 per cent in the gas, heat and
water earnings and none in the street
and interurban railway earnings In
operate, would operate all these various
kinds of businesses. 1t is explained the
estimated increases are based on past ex-
perience.
The depreciation, It is explained, IL
figured on the basis of 2 per cent on 6
valuation of SO. 900 900, plus per cent
on 100000 to be spent for additions and
Improvements before Dec. 81. 1922. 1t /;
stated this calculation Is equivalent to
calculating a depreciation Of per cent
on the depreciable portions OF the prop
erty.
The closing statements brought out the
contentious of the respondents that OF
the proposed basis of capitalization Il
would be utterly impossible to meet fixed
charges, and, further, that the Indiana
Electric Corporation does not intend to
build a central power plant and trans
mission lines as it originally announced
The petitioners attorneys presented only
brief arguments, repeating to a large
extent contentious they already have
made.
The petitioner has contended that tho
properties II hopes to purchase have o
total value of $40, 600 900 and asks for a
capitalization Of about $21, 900, 600. The
respondents have contended that the
property value is only about half this
amount ana that any capitalization ABOVE
this amount would be so much water.
These are the principal questions in
volved.
Fred Bates johnson, attorney for tn,
city Of Kokomo, IN his closing argument
undertook to show that the company, Il
1t carries out its plans, would find Itself
Immediately in a financial hole.
He places the minimum valuation Of the
property which must be found to carry
the securities tn epetitoiner hopes to Is
sue at s16,552, 600 although he fixed tht
actual value at far below this figure. This
Is based on proposed securities issues anc
the proposed assumption OF present in.
debtedness. An 8 per cent return on this
! figure-the maximum OF return usually
allowed-would amount TO 1924 o6O, h'
hnds. The available return on the pres
ent properties, after deducting per cen
depreciation and other charges. would b.
/ s726002 49, based on the figures OF tht
corporations by expert accountants, ht
said. This, he contends, would leave
deficit Of S50S .957.52 under the per cen
return allowed
Using the same method Of calculation
but basing it on the figures OF the &C
| counting department OF the public serv
| ice commission, Mr.. johnson hnds Their,