Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-08-31

Merchants Heat and Light Company, WAS
recalled TO the stand by respondents and
testified that about - per cent of the
property OF the local company is electric
ity- generating property. 1t is the con-
tention of the respondents that this
would be junked should current be sup
piled from a central power station, as
proposed by the petitioner. BE testified
that at the present time the equipment
of the company just takes care OF the
load and the company would be required
TO purchase additional current should
business increase.
The petitioner fled as an exhibit the
consideration to be paid stockholders for
the KOkomO property and for the wabash
property. F. the Wabash property, ac-
cording to the exhibit, there is to be paid
S537, 800 in cash and $3S5.5O0 in securities.
Besides this, total Indebtedness of $780,
500 is to be assumed and retired, making
the total purchase price S1,129,SO0
For the KOkomo property the corpora
ton, according to the exhibit, will pay
| 81, 5O2, $50 cash, $15S,275 in securities and
Will assume binds tOtalling S1s16,OOO.
This makes a total purchase price of
| S3,47C,3O5.
The feature of the case Tuesday after
noon was the continuance of the testf-
| mOny of Joseph H. Brewer, Grand Rapids.
! He testified he is president Of the Mer-
chants Heat and Light Company, the Elk
hart Gas and Fuel Company, the Valpar-
also Lighting Company, the Merchants
Public Utility Company, the Indiana Elec-
| tric Corporation and the American Public
/ Utilities Company, all of which are in
/ 2 ~ ira
In answer 20 question Of Fred Bates
johnson, attorney for the city Of Kokomo,
/ Mr. Brewer testified there is no agree
ment for the Indiana Electric Corporation
TO assume the obligations Of the Mer-
chants Heat and Light Company. Mr..
/ johnson then asked If there is any under
/ standing in the matter.
1T Is the purpose of the corporation to
! assume the obligations Of the Merchants
| Heat and Light Company" he replied.
There is an understa nding among our
I selves as 10 how we Will do this thing"
/ In answer to another question he said
! the corporation intends to assume the OBJ
/ legations OF the Indiana Railways and
Light Company Of KokomO, but there is
no understanding.
I AGREEMENTS WITH
/ SEVERAL COMPANIES.
Have you talked TO any officer Of the
Indiana Railways and Light Company
concerning this natter" Mr.. johnson
, asked.
mot as an officer" Mr.. Brewer said.
Have you talked to any large stock
/ holder?"
Yes, Mr.. George J. Marott."
What was the conversation?"
Charles Mcpherson. an attorney for pc
/ titioner, objected dema nding to know the
pertinancy Of the question. Commissioner
George Barnard ruled the exact converse
/ ton was not necessary to the case. sam
I uel Ashby, corporation counsel for the
city of Indianapolis, declared the CONVEX
satiOn is necessary in order to determine
what understanding Mr.. Brewer had with
Mr.. Marott. Mr.. Barnard then asked what
conditions were agreed upOI.
"The understanding was that tho In
diana Electric Corporation is TO assume
the obligations of the Indiana Railways
and Light Company" Mr. Brewer said.
Does the Indiana Railways and Light
Company get anything elsei" Mr.. johnson
asked.
We are not dealing with the Indiana
Railways and Light Company, but with
stockholders. We would prefer not to
state publicly what our conditions are
The commission does not want any
private understandings or conversations
Mr. Barnard said. But some Of these
questions are competent. The crux OF
the whole matter is to determine on
terms, conditions and valuations Any
thing that viii enlighten the commission
/ is competent"
OBJECTS TO
/ Barring DETAILS.
Mr.. Mcpherson declared there has been
/ a concerted attempt TO obstruct the pro-
ceediRgs without regard to valuations. He
said he had been Informed that william
L. Taylor. an attorney for the respon-
dents. had fled his appearance without
the knowledge Of the power users be
claims to represent He said options
have been taken for some stock and they
are not closed. He said 1t may be the
commission Is entitled to know how much
is being paid for stocks, but ii is not
fair to give the details TO opposing in
terssts.
This Is an entirely new angle in this
case" Mr.. Johnson declared. Now 1t
is asserted that it is to be a purchase
of stock and not of property"
81 did not say the Indiana Electric
Corporation is buying the stock" Mr..
Mcpherson replied.
Il have no objections 20 stating the
aggregate amount" Mr.. Brewer said.
Mr.. Ashby objected to an aggregate
amount, declaring that each community
has a right to know what involves the
property Of that community.
Mr.. johnson resumed his questioning
what, If any, consideration was to
pass to the Indiana Railways and Light
Company" he asked.
The Indiana Railways AID Light Com
pany was not party to any contract
with Mr.. Marott.'' he replied.
nMhat consideration is to 20 to Nj