New Britain herald., 1924-03-12
Stamford Mayor Tells P. U. C.
 Connecticut Co. Is a Corpse


 tied 10 corpse.
 The only other display of fireworks during the hearing was lighted when Robert P. Butler, acting as a repre- sentative of the counsel from the other cities, asked for statistics to be produced by the Connecticut compa ny showing operating costs and the in come of the lines in the cities repre- scented at the meeting. Joseph P. Berry and George D. Watrous, coun- sel for the Connecticut company, re- piled that it would be task which would prove stupendous both from the amount of work required and from a financial viewpoint. MT. But Ter asked the counsel for the com pany if they did not know the cost lof operating a car on the Pennington avenue line and the income from car on that line. He was told that the company simply knew the income from the line. Mir. Butler replied that it was time that the company put in an accounting system which would show the profit on each line and remarked that he doubted if there were many private business ventures that were operated in such 8 manner as the company operated its lines, not knowing definitely which lines were profitable and which were not.
 Two Lines Here Not Profitable Thomas J. McGreavy, accountant for the company, when asked if he knew what lines were paying and what lines showed loss, said that he did and recited a number of such lines, designating the Pennington avenue and Berlin lines of the Now Britain division as lines which did not pay ther operating costs and taxes. When asked by Mir. Butler as to how hc could determine which lines paid profit and what lines did not. he said that by the income received from certain lines in comparison with the revenue received from other lines it was obvious" that certain lines were operated at a loss. Despite the fact That this answer was not satisfactory to the counsel from the cities it was impossible to get any other statement from the accountant as to how he knew when line was being operated at q loss, other than that it was lob vious" by comparison with other lines.
 In answer to a question of Thomas R. Robinson, special counsel from New Haven, as to whether he could give definite figures showing what profit or loss was incurred on a limo the witness testified that he could not do so. The witness, answering n question as to how service was gov. erned on line, he said that it was governed according 10 the traffic on tho line. When asked if it was done according to the returns from the line the witness answered that it was not. Answering questions as to wheth- CT or not the fares could not be reg ulated from the returns on the line in order to make tho line operate at profit the witness said that 1t could be theoretically done.
 New Britain Division Value
 E. Irving Rudd. engineer for the utilities commission, who, assisted by other engineers, made q physical valuation Of the Connecticut com pany's property in 1919-20 was the next witness 10 be put on the stand and was asked to explain the method used in finding the physical valuation Of the property at that time.
 MT. Riidd read n detailed account giving the following valuations: Property owned and leased. s60.753.- 352.0o: property owned si1 .000.000; Connecticut R. R. and Lighting Co, s41, 900. .000. The witness testified that 0I s,a s..lx was arrived at was by placing q price that it would cost to build new, using prices prevailing between 1910, 1914 plus S0fs. on every piece Of property used and useful that belonged 10 the company. Divisions were made in cluding property within the city and without the city. The total physical valuation for tho New Britain division which includes Berlin. Newington and Lazy Lane was s2.1t1.257.ss. includ- ing valuation without the city limits of s923.500.59 and valuation within tho city of si.isS.757.07. This talua- ton vas arrived at with tho cost-to- build-ncw. at prices prevailing be- tween 1910 and 1914, plus so per cent. The total valuation of the Con necticnt company's property through out the state vas given as s51.9lf.- s3i.t3. including the cities S34.G26.- Stn.s7 and within the cities S17,Sla.- ta0.46. In answer 10 question by nr. Butler the engineer testified that in these figures no percentage for de- preciation Eas taken off.
 Asked bv MT. Butler what the cost nf making q physical valuation com plete in every detail would be at the present timt the engineer replied that ft would probably cost in the neigh Fpnrhood Of se5a.oao. and would take ,anyr herc from ctght months to ono ypar.
 In answer to question by Corpora ton counsel John ". fIirEhan Of this city as to what percentage the wit ns.ss frt pas fair 10 add 10 tho fig ures 0f 1919 10 make them appiica ble in issi. Eudd replied that h" was not qualified 10 answer that question.
 How Oltr Company StatiStics