Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, July 12, 1902, Page 9

e Full Stenographic Report of Hearing in Mandamus Case by Nebraska - Supreme Court- THE OMAHA DAILY BEE: RAILROAD TAXATION After the supreme court had announced | its intention of hearing the evidence, the reported to you?! A.—5,703.32 miles. proceedings were as follows: Q.—Do you know how many miles of side- Mr. Harrington—The relators now offer | track there were? A.—I do mot remember in evidence the return to the aiternative | fow; no, sir. writ filed In this court May 26, 1902, known | (Book marked exhibit 34.) as the original answer. Mr. Simeral--The relator offers in evi- Mr, Prout—That 18 & part of the files of | dence all of exhibits 1 to 34, inelusive. No this squrt, and of course it does not need | objection. Received in evidenc to be ntroduced | you the assessment for 10017 Chlef Justice ‘Sullivan—Of course it was | ir; 1 found it. cuperseded by the other. Q.~On what page is that? A.—Page 165. Mr. Harridgton-<Yes, vour honor. Q1 will ask you to state what the num- Same was recelved in evidence. ber of miles of ratiréad assessed for that Charles Weston, being first duly sworn, | year was. testtfiod as follows, oxamined by Mr. Sim-| Mr. Prout—The respondents object to that eral: a8 irrelevant, incompetent and {mmaterial. Q.—8tate your nsme, piease, and your| Chlef Justice Sullivan—Without finally de- official poeition. A.—Charles Weston, audi- | elding that question, we will receive the tor of public accounts of the state of Ne- | evidence, on the theory that fraud is an brask. fas Q.—You have been auditor for how long? A—Since the 34 of January, 1901 Q1 will ask you it you have the off- clal files provided far by scctions 30 and 40 of the Nebraska revenue law, made by the rallroads and telegraph compunies and sleeping car companies that are operating in this state? A.~~I have; yes; sir. mijles of raliroad there were in the state ~—5,706.32 miles. Q.<~And state the valuation or assessed valuation of 10017 A.—$26,422,732.30. QI will ask you to state if this book is one of the official records of your office? ATt fs. Q.—And it shows the assessment for how many years back? A.—Since and including Mr. Weston also identified assesament re- | 1895 turns 6t the St. Joseph & Grand lsland | la.-«mnc- and including 18957 A.—Yes, (marked exhibit 2); exhibit 3, of the | elr Kansas Oity & Omaba ' Railroad com- | Q-—Have you the books showing the same pany -for 100; exhibit 4, the return|{aX prior to that in your ofice? A.—Yes, made by the Chicago, ~St. Paul, | ®IF | Minneapolis & Omaha Rallway company for | Q-—And have you got them here? A~% 1902; exhibit 5, for the Chicago, Rock Island [ Bave not: no, sir. & Pacific Ralliroad company for 1902; ex-| Q—Will you produce thos A.—Yet Bibit for the Missouri Pacific Railway|®ir: I MV; !M‘_bwk here showing the company for 1902; exhibit 7, for the Union | Sexment for T, ‘Pacific Rallroad company for 1902; exhibit | e r'f )“‘ffln— ‘e will make an offer for the Omaha & Republican Valley w:"‘:h T:: l!l. lnl v::'l.l be a mi % branch of the Union Pacific Raflway com-| mHich KIS 16 59 HEput, of tfl-‘m pany for 1002; exhidit 9, for the Chicago & | IS B VL DR IO (208 SR SO0 Northwestern Rallway company. for 1002 | 0, UL Ul nu{;cln:mlm“ ncom=~ exhibit 10, the Republican VaMey & E“IM bty gy "m‘m.)-r . (Overs Wyoming Ralway company, lhc‘ Repl::; yliire e ot oo LR Oxtord v‘tu"!(ml::- o irosd | company, | 70U to state it that document was on fle in your office showing the ratio of assess- the Omaha & Southwestern Rallroad | poni'oe property in the varlous counties of company; the Omaha & North PIatte . oae for the year 19027 A.—It is a Raiiroad company, the Nebriska & Colo-| porija) compilation made from reports, I rado Rallroad tompany, the Nebr Rall- | wij) gay from county clerks, 1 recelved trom way company, the Lincoln & NorthWestern | oounty clerks, of the various counties, in Rallroad company, the Lincolg ‘& Black | egard to the results of the assessors’ meet- Hills Ralirosd company, the Grand Island, | jnee 1old on the third Tuesday in March. Wyoming & Central Railroad company, the| g And when did you receive these let- Chicago, Kansas & Nebraska Railrond €om- | yory? A.—1 wrote the county clerks soon pany; the Atchison & Nebraska Rallroad | geier the meetings of the assessors and company and the Burlington & Missourl) reccived these letters in reply. River Raliroad company, for 1903; exhibit| o_ Anq thie is a compllation made from 11, for the Fromont, Elkhorn & Missour! | (nose letters? A.—A partial compliation Valley Rallréad company, for 1902; exhibit | of those lotters. 12, for the Postal Telégraph ‘company: | ‘Q.—-And was made for the purpose of exhibit 1%, for the Western .. Union Tele- ['nging it as & basis? * A.—As a matter of graph company; exhivit 14, for the. PWll- | information. man company; exhibit 15, for the Kearney | Q.—As a matter of information in & Black Hills branch of the Union Paclfic | ing rallroad properties and others? Rallroad company; exhibit 16, showing the | Yes, sir. schedule of property belonging to the| Q.—DIid you make an estimate of the I ‘Unlon Pacific Rallroad company; exhibit 17, | crease In the asse of this year ov showing the mileage, capital stock, earn- the last? A.—You mean the aggregate as- ings and opersting expenses of the Union sessment ? Pacific Rallroad company. filéd May §, 1903; ,Q~Yes, sir, A.—No, sir, T aid not. exhibit' 18, showldg mileage, capital stock, | Q-—Who was it made it in your office? operating expenses of the Mr. Kelby—That is objected to 1n- Kansas City & Northwestern Raltroad com- competent, irrelevant and immaterial, and pany, filed June b, 1902; exhibit l).‘l;:d ::::: mot been shown there is any in- ol - ¢ 3;“;"“'}““.’““2;.:‘,‘ O OMIbit 30, fled| Chlef Justice Sullivan—Technically, I e ary 16, 1903, being the report ot _the | think the objection is good. Blk- Q.—I will ask you to state, Mr. Weston, it board of directors of the Premont, you had Poor's Manual in your possession 8- A— orm s Tne. tHoardowt i | In the ofica of the board, at the. ime that roctors’ ‘of 'ke: Ohioagn "\l NGFN. !(NASs saseasmontd were made? - A~it wes sent for by the governor during the sittl jof the board and was consulted by him once or twice. Q.—You had it there? A.—We had it there, but I never coneulted it mywelf. western Railroad company, and also that of the Sloux City & Pacific Rallroad com- pany; exhibit 21, showing & statement of the Pacific Rallroad company In Nebraska; exhibit 22, filed by the Missourl Paclfic | "y’ gimerai_The relator offers 1n evi Rallway company, dated June 32, 1802 | gonog Poor's Manual for 1901, it being the exhibit 23, for the Chicago, Rook Taland & | pirer fourth annual report. Pacifio “Ratiwayvoompany, ; fled.Mareh .8, | Mr Prout—To which the respondentd ob- 1902; exhibit 24, for the Chicago, St. Paul fyect g tncompetent, irrelevant and imma- Minneapolis & Omaha railroad, filed May |iorig). 27, 1902; exhibit 25, for Bloux City & West- | Ghier Justice Sullivan—I think it may be ern branch of the Wilmar & Sioux Falls | peceivea, Railroad company, filed March 11, 1902 | 'Q__Now, I will ask you to state, Mr. exhibit 26, a letter to the board filed Auring | Weston, if these letters which I hand you, the sitting of the board; exhibit 27, for the | bound in letter index No. 15, are the ones St. Joe & Grand Island Rallroad COMDADY |that were written to you by the various and also the Kansda Clty & Omaba Rallroad | county clerks throughout the state and of company, filed February 3, 1902} “lhk 2% | which this exhibit 35 is & compllation? A.— 1 for the Fremont, Blkhorn & Missourl|ye, Valley Railroad company, flled Januar?{ Mr. Simeral—The relator offers in evi- 81, 1003; exhibit 29, the forty- | dence exhibit 86, belng the bound volume seventh annual report of the board | contalning letters referred to in the last ot directors of the Chicago, Burling- | question, together with the letters. ton & Quincy Raliroad company and objection. Recelved in evidence.) letters pinned to it, filed May 23, Q.—Mr. Weston, were there any other exhibit 30, a doe nt. addressed to the | documents besides these that you have ‘Board of Equallzation of the state of Ne- | brought into court flled with you or used ‘braska and signed and sworn to by Edward | by you in reference to the_ assessment of A.—There (No Rosewater, filed May 14, belng & pro- | railroad property this year? tost Mr. two - | were some compilation of figures furnished o oBt Tequesting the board | us by the differént rallroad companles—by 10 assess property - and chises of | the tax commissioner of the different rail- the various roads; exhbibit 81, 32 and documents filed by Mr. Rosewater at the | Q.—And have you those In your posses- same time. slon. A.—I belleve they are in my desk; Mr. Howe—Did you not recelve a letter | yes, sir. addressed to the board from Mr. Harrings | Q—WIll you be kind emough to bring ton, the relator, with relation to the ass |them in? = A.—Yes, s sessing of rallroad property for this yeaf| Q.—Now, was there anything more that he sitting of the board? A.~I [you had before you as a Board of Bqualisa- governor recelved such a letter | tion this year, documents or anything of ‘and read it to the board. that kind, that have not been produced Mr. Simeral: Q.—Mr. Weston, the as- |here? A.—Why, we consulted the property sesement was made the 16th of May? A.— |schedule for or two years prior to the That was the date of the final adjournment | return for the year 1902. f the board; yes, sir, Q-—~Property schediles of what? A.— Q.—Had you made your assessment prior | Of the rallroads, similar to those thet are fo that time or at that time?! A.—We |Introduced. A # made it at that time. Q.~Mr. Weston, in making up your estl- Q.—~Now, handing you & book, being a |m: of the valuation of other property record, I will ask you to state what this [ tham railroads did you take into considera- book . A.—It is & record of the assess- [tion the city assessment for Omahs, South ment of the various raliroads in the state, (Omaha and Lincoln? A.~You mean the showing the distribution to the different |separaté assessments that was made for in the state through which each | city purposes? No, sirj we did not. f Q—DId you have any returns showing #tate what is the total amount |that? A.—No, sir, we did not. t for the year| Q.—Do you know what.is the percentage Of assessment ln Omaha.- A.~I do not. QDo you know what It is in Lincoln? A.—I do not. Q—These papers that you have testified to and that have been offered In evidence Q1 will ask you to state how many L _______ - s exhibits, do they bear filing marks of your office, the most of them? A.—Most A Word of them do, yes, sir. To the WIiSe|-irm e s s on e o Cross-examination by Mr. Baldwi Q~—Mr. Weston, what was the standard Whon g4 $rs Hilih artal ropery of ralouds (o stessment ‘ur. oses o] :‘::Il):f nl‘fil b:n will eool n.nc’l e y Jou, Mr. Simeral—We object to that as im- purify your blood. proper cross-examination. Chiet Justice Sullivan—Objection sus- Lime Juice A" Approximaiey. vs tained. is the product of the chOICEst | cre-csmmmiinn T 1* M tmprover 1903, A.—3$26,689,692.70. of yaluation er ratio for assesment pur- poses? Mr.'Simeral—Objected to as incompetent and not proper cross-examinatioun. Chtef Justice Sulllvan—Overruled. Q-—~Mr. Weston, did you fix any standard xamination. West Indfan Lime Fruit, and Chiet Justice. Sullivaa—Objection sus- is ktgo'“ the wi;:;::l::;:: ts il;v a1 you areive at 11 QM n e’ r. Howe—Objeot to as jmproper “'Ym“ grocer or druggist has :‘;:w J-u::-'":'uuvn—omcuu over- Part 11, A.—~By consulting the returns that we recelved from the countles and also the grand assessment rolls of previous years. Q.—What were the returns you particu- larly refer to? A.—The returns that were sent to me from county clerks as the prob- able action of the jessors in the different counties and also from a comparison of those returns, with the action of assessors in vious years In essing differe: species of property throughout the state. Q. —What was the result of this investi- gation and this information which you had recelved from these comparisons? Mr. Simeral—We object to that as | competent and improper cross-examin: tion. Chiet talned. Q~—In the formation of your judgment, Mr. Weston, as & member of the board, did you take Into consideration that these raflroads that you were actively engaged in the business of operating rall- ronds? Mr. Howe—That Is objected to as In- competent and not proper cross-examina- tion. s Chiet Justice tained. Q.~Did you consult and consider tho records of not only this year, but prior years, with .reference to the return made of the earnings of the different rallroads? Mr. Simeral—That is objected to as in- competent and not proper cross-examina- tion. Chief Justice Sulllvan—Objection over- ruled. 3 A.—~We did. Q.—Were there any different persons ap- pearing before the board at the time you were considering the question of assess- ments, making arguments or statements? Mr. Simeral-—-Objected to as not proper cross-examination. Chief Justice Sulllvan—Objection over- rule A.—Thers were. Q.—Did Mr. Rosewater appear before the board. A.—He did. Q—Mr. Weston, I will ask you to exam- ine that paper, which {s marked exhibit 35. Have you examined it? A.~I ha Q—Do you recall these statements that are contained therein as made before the board? ‘es, sir, that is my recollec- tion of the comversation at that time be. tween myself and Mr. Rosewater and be- tween Mr. Rosewater and the governor. Q~—Mr. Weston, have you recelved these statemer that were flled? A.—Those that Mr, Simeral spoke of? Q.~Yes, sir. A.~—Yes, sir. Mr, Bimeral—We desire to offer in evi- dence these documents, exhibits 39 and 40. (No objection; recelved In evidence.) Mr. Baldwin—The respondents offer in evidence exhibit 38. Mr. Simeral—Reserving a general objec- tion to this method of cross-examination, we have mo specific objections to this ex- hibit 38, but ge: proper cross-exat Chiet Justice Sullivan—It may be re- celved. Q.—Mr. Weston, .your attention was called to exhibit No. 40, offered by the re- lator, which was a »f ment of Mr. Scrib- ner, the tax commissioner of the Union Pacific. 1 do not now.recall whether you sald that was filed or not. Was it filed? ~It does not contain the flling mark. of the office, but it was left with me and h been on my desk. Q. —Was it before the assessment was made? Did you have it before you made the assessment? A.—' sir, before the assessment was n ade a copy of this was furnished, I think, to every n:ember of the board. Q.—For the purpose of refreshing your memory, Mr, Weston, I would ask you if it {s not a fact that at the time of that hearing Mr. BScribner, from this paper marked exhibit 40, read in full that part of this paper which contained the evidence ‘of J. B. Berry, chief engineer of the Union Pacific Rallroad company, his evidence be- ing given in what was called the penalty sult of cost of reproduction of the Union Pacific rallroad at about that time, 19017 A.~It 1s my recollection he did. Q.—Read that in full? A.—Yes, sir, Q—From this statement to the board? A—Yes, sir. Q.—Also at the time of that hearing, when Mr. Scribner was present, did he read to you the statement of the bond and stock \ssue of the Union Pacific Railroad com- pany, and the Oregon Short Line and Ore- gan Rallway and Navigation company? For the purpose of refr ug your memory, 1 would like to ask you to examine this e hibjt 14, A.—I cannot state positively in regard to that, but my impression is that he did. Q.—Refreshing your recollection again— Mr. Harrington—You may offer it, Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin—Then I offer it as a part of the cross-examination. ‘ Mr. Harrington—We will agree that the annual report of the Union Pacific can be oftered in full. Mr, Baldwin—I don't know as we have any objection to that. We will offer in evidence exhibit No. 41. (No objection. Recelved in evidence.) Mr. White—Mr. Weston, in valuing the property of the different rallroads you eon- sidered the schedules, did you, that wer left with the board for consideration by the representatives of the different roads? - A.— 1 don’t understand exactly what you mean by & schedule. Q.—The schedules required by section 39, A.—Oh, yes, sir, we did. Q—And you had before you testimony Justice Sulllvan—Objection sus- Bulllvan—Objection sus- and information given orally by repre- sentatives of the different roads? A.—Yes, sir. Q Grandon, the representative of the Elkhorn, and also Mr. Bidwell, its general manager, appeared before you, did they not? A.—Yes, sir. Q.~And you re ed Information from th concerning the value of the Eikhorn line, did you not? A.—Orally, yes, sir. Q.—What was the information with re- spect to the cost of reproduction of that rord? Mr. Bimeral—That 1s objected to as im- proper at present. Chiet Justice Sullivan—Overruled. stated by Mr. Bidwell to be nd and some hundreds of dollars; I can't give it exactly. Q.—That was with reference to the whole road?! A.—Yes, sir; per mile. Q—And its rolling stock and roadbed? A.—Rolling stock and roadbed, yes, sir. Q—Now, were there any representations in regard to the fact that physically it terminated at certaln polnts in Wyoming and South Dakota? A.—I think, my r ollection Is that Mr. Bidwell made some reference to that fact. Q~—Was there a statement further that it 44 pot participate in transcontivental trafie? Al think that was included in Mr. Bidwell's statement. Q—Did you have any testimony before you, or any information before you, rela- tive to the earnings of the Elkhorn com- pany for different years prior to and in cluding 18017 A.—We consulted the re- turps that were for the year 1301 and also the earnings of the company as contained in the anoual reports or the bleanial re- "IN COURT SATURDAY ports of the auditor. I think we consulted Mr. Cornell's last blennial report; I think that was the only one, and different reports that the raliroads made subsequently. Q.—Was the information before you that for at least three years, 18906, 1896 and 1807, that the Elkhorn road had been operated at a loss? A.—~No, sir, I don't remember that, Q.—~Was not there some years in which there were deficits? Was that considered by you? A.~We did not look far emough back to find that, I do mot think; that Is my recollection. Q.~Was that called to your attention at all; that it was operated at & loss? A.—I think the fact was mentloned by Mr. well with reference to some prior years. Q.—Yes, sir, that ls what I meant. A.— Yes, sir, but that is all. Q.—Did you not have a document before you which was prepared by Mr. Whitney, showing the of real property in 4l ferent counties, and showing what tI property had been assessed for? A.—Yes, sir, 1 aid. Q.—~Is that document among the do ments that have been offered in evidence here? A.—No, sir, it Is not. Q—Deo you know where that is? A.—I do mnot. Q.~But you had such a document? A.— 1 had such a docymen! it disappeared from my desk and I don’t know where it is. Q.—You do not know where it f6? A. No, sir. Q. —~Well, it was from that document, with other documents and the other ev! various raflroads In the state of Nebraska should be for the purposes of taxation? A—Yes, sir, together with a general knowledge of the situation in the state. Q.—QGeneral knowledge of what assess- ments had been and were?! A.—Yes, sir. Redirect Examination by Mr. Harrington —Calling your attention to the statement purporting to be dated In April, and made on behalf of the Burlington company, Mr. ‘Weston, as a matter of fact was that ever placed in your hands until after the as- ssments were made? A.—Yes, sir; my recollection is that we had that prior te the meeting of the board. 'Q.~~Wasn't that prepared after Mr. Rose- water made his argument, some days? A. ~No, sir, I think not. Q.—Now, sir, you say you took into con- sideration the stock and bond of the Unfon Pacific, do you? A.—No, sir, I did not say that. Q.—What did you say with reference to stock and bonds? A.~I'don't think the records show that I made any stateme as to stock and bonds. Q.—DId you, or did you not, ascertain the value of the Union Pacific pér mile? A.—So far as the tangible property is con- cerned, we attempted to do th Q.—Only the tangible property? A.— That was my understanding at that time. Q.~You took the testimony that Engi- neer Berry gave in the Peénalty case In the federal court to the cost of reproducing the Union Pacific rallroad? A.—~I don't think, as a matter of fact, that we paid very much attention to that estimat Q.—In any event, all you assessed or at- tempted to value in any respect with ref- erence to the Unlon Pacific railroad was the tans property of:the cerporation? A.~That was our view.of tha matter, yes, sir. o] Q.—You aid not ass or aid mot at- tempt to assess or place’ a value in any respect upon the franchise or intangible property of the corporatioh? A.—No, sir. Q.—Ygpu never took into consideration its contract with the Rock Island or Mil- waukee for the use of the Unlon Pacific bridge?’ A.—I knew nothing about that. Q.—The reports before you showed that those contracts existed. ~A.~I overlooked . Q~—Did you take into consideration the fact that it was owner of stock in the Union Pacific Land company to the amount of $10,000,000? A.—No, sir, we did not. Q—Did you take into consideration the fact that it was the owner of coal stocks to the amount of $5,000,0007 A.—We did not; no. Q.—Did you know as a matter of fact that the statement filed by the Unlon Pacific was misleading In the fact that they make deductions for bonds of more than the whole bonded debt? A.—~You mean unde section 887 Q.—Yes, sir. A.—No, sir. Q.—No, no, that last paper there? This? A.—No, sir, I did not examine that critics ally. I don't know anything sbout it. Q.—You did not know that that $332,000,- 000 is ail misleading? Mr. Baldwin—That Is objected to as in- competent, irrelevant and immaterial. Q~—Do you know whether the statement by which they deducted $332,000,000 from supposed assets of the company is correct or mot?' A~I don’t know; I did pot in- vestigate those figures at all. Q.—But yet, sir, that is the very table on which Governor Savage made the esti- mate that the Union Pacific raliroad was worth only $45,000 a mile, Is it not? A.—I don’t know. ~—You know that he claimed that was the basis? A.~That was my recollection of the conversation between Governor Savage and Mr. Rosewater. Q.—You do not know todey and you can- not inform this court at this time what the Union Pacific raliroad is worth a mile, can you?! A.—Probably net, sir. Q~—You had mo information before you a8 to the mumber of thousands of doll of stock against each mile of the Union Pacific rallway in Nebraska? A.—No, sir, 1 believe not. .Q—You did not know then and you do not know now the funded debt of the Union Pacific rallroad in Nebraska? A.—I @id not; no, sir, Q~You did pet know then and you do not know now the total funded debt of the Unlon Pacific rallroad? A.—No, sir. Q.—You did not kmow then amd you not know now the amount of the preferred stock and the value thereof of the Union Pacific rallroads? A.—No, sir, I not. Q. —You did not know then and you de not know now the amount of its common stock and the value thereof, do you? A.— No, sir. Q.—You slmply took the statement that it cost about $30,000 a mile to reproduce it? A.~As 1 said » moment ago, I do wot think we gave any consideration to that state- ment. Q.—How did you get at the value of the Union Pacific rallroad? A.—We did not base our estimate on that. Q. —What did you estimate to be the value of the tangible property of the Union Pacific rallrcad? A.—I think the assess- ment was $9,850 & mile. Q.—You mean that is for the main line only? A.—That is for the main line, yes, sir, per mile. Q.—What do you mean by the term tangi- ble property? Its roadbed? A.—All of its physical property. Q.<The branch lines you mssessed very differently? A.—Certatnl: Q.—Did you know or have any reason to belleve that the Union Pacific rallroad was worth (a cash at that time upward of §100, J. 12, 1902. A.~No, sir. Q~Did you know that the west half of the Union Pacific bridge, within a year past, had become subject to assessment by the state board and not by loeal authori- ties? A.—I understood that from the at- torney general, that is all. Q.—Did you add anything to the value of the Unlon Pacific road as a result of thet? A~1 don't think we did. Q—That simply went for nothing in the final adjustment. You know that, don't you? A.—I don't think that we looked at it that way, no, sir. Q—Well, you did not increase its assess- ment any as & result of it? A.—No, sir. Q.—Did you look into the question of the tolls that are charged on that bridge? A.— No, sir, a1d not. Q~Did you inquire to find out.whether they charged a rate upon that bridge ten times as high as they do on ordinary mile- age In the state. A.—No, sir. Q~DI4 you add anything for the Unlon Pacific depot, the Union depot down there on the Union Pacific? A.—No, sir, not this year. Q.—DId you consider the fact that during the preceding year they had spent more than $4,900,000 in improving the line, add- ing to the value of ita property, all out of its earnings? A.—No, air. Q—DId you consider the fact that they had spent more than four milliens of do lars In buying mew engines and equipment? A.~No, sir. Q—DId you consider the fact that they had spent $3,000,000 in betterments outside of the $4,900,000 I have mentioned? A.—That tact was mot before us. Q.~—None of those things? A.—No, sir. Q.—Do you know that all of these thin that I have been speaking of were Included in the return? A.—No, sir, I don't know that. Q—Do you know how many engines the Unon Pacific owned? A.—~We did from their report; that is, that they were using in Nebraska. Q—Do you know what you valued those engines at? A.—~I do not remember now, Do, sir, Q.—How much aplece? member mow, no, sir. Q.~Have you no idea? A.—I think it was in the nelghborhood of $9,000. Q.~Nine thousand dollars for each en- gine? A.—From $8,000 to $9,000; that is full valuation. Q.~—You know, Mr. Weston, that the Chi- cago, Burlington & Quincy rallroad was operating about 2,400 miles of railroad in Nebraska at that time? A.—I knew that they were operating a considerable amount of rallroad; 1 did not figure it up to know Just how much it was. Q.—Did you assess any property in Ne- braska against the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy rallroad? A.—No, sir, we did not; that was not our idea at that time. Q.—You did not assess any amount or any property up to the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy raiiroad at all? A.—Any property? A.~T don't re- Q~VYes, sir. A~To the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy. Q—Yes, sir. A.~—No, sir; I think not, Q.—You simply took these defunct cor- porations that have not done any business in the state for years and assessed It in thelr names? A.—We made the a 8- ments under the names that the returns ‘were made to us. Q.—As & matter of fact, you knew that all of this system was being operated by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy railroad, didn’t you? A.~I knew that, yi sir. ~Did you, at the time you made this assessment, have any statement from the Chlcago, Burlington & Quincy rafiroad as to the amount of its stock and bonds? A.— I think that statement was flled with us before the time the board adjourned. Q—Wasn't it flled after the board ad- Journed After this mult was filed here A.—1 caznot say positively. Q—Now the statement of the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy rallroad was filed on the 23d of May, wasn't it? A—It ap parently was from that mark, yes sir. I don't rémember positively when it was filed. I know it wasn't flled at the time the other reports were filed and I asked Mr. Pollard, th~ tax commissioner of the Burlington Railroad company, “specially for 1t. Q—DId you know that during the past two or three years a depot has been buflt by the Burlingtoz in Omaha that cost sev- eral hundred thousand dollars? Mr. Kelby—Objected as assumed the cost of the bullding. (Overruled.) A.~I bave had general knowledge of the fact that & depot was built In Omaha eev- eral years ago by the Burlington, but how much it cost I am unable to say and have no knowledge of the fact at the present time, Q.—To what corporation dld you figure that depot belonged? A.—My recollection is that it belongs to the Omaha & Southwest- ern; I think that is the name of the corpo- ration, Q.—DId you add to the value of for the depot and all those terminal A~ That was Included in the assessment of the valuation of the Omaha & Southwestern. Q.—Don’t you know for that depot and terminals alone that it would require you | to make more of a valuation than you did for the whole raliroad? A.—No, sir. Q—How Idng is that Omaha & Southwest- ern rallroad? A.—Well, I can't state now. The record there show: Q—Only fifty miles? A.—I don't know. Q—And in what county Is 1t? A.—The records there show. I don’t remember. Q.—You don’t remember? A.—No, don’t remember. The records show. Q.—Did you estimate or did you know that the terminals of the Omaha & South- western alone would make $30,000 & mile for Omaha & Southwestern? A.—No, sif. ~—How about the Unlon Pacific te: minal? What did you allow for those? A.— They were estimated in the aggregate value of the road, but what it was now I can't state. Q—Now find out for us what you estl- mated the value of the Unlon Pacifie ter- minals of Omaha to be? A.—I cannot do it now because I haven't the figure: Q.—Well, the whole matter is her #? A.~—No, » there. Q—Well, what other information have you? A.~—All the information we had is what s there, I suppose. Q.—Then I wish you would tell us at what you valued the Union Pacific terminals at Omaha? A.—I can't do that now, Q.—Cannot you find out from this Infor- mation here? A.—No, sir; not from this in- formation. Q.—Where is the information from which you can find out? A.—~When we were mak- ing an estimate of the value of this prop- erty we used a great many figures and memoran that are not now preserved. The record there is simply a statement of the amount of the property, but what valua- tion we put upon each item of preperty in- cluded In that statement I canpot say now, Q~Did you make y estimate, gener- ally speaking, of the terminals in Omaha? A~ will say in regard to that matter that we did mot figure the matter out closely; that we were lar guided In making that assessment by the assessments of gprevious years. Q—You didn't take Into consideration the fact that those terminals today, owing to the lacreased population of the stat had greatly increased in value? A.—No, sir, we dido’t look at it In that way. Q—DId you know that the terminals in Omaba\ are worth today more than $10,000,- 0007 A~ didn’t know it. Q-~And you didn't try to get that In- formation before exercislng your dutles as & member of this board? A.—I didn't know it at the time; wo, sir, Q—How did you distribute the terminals, r, I fsn’t ir; the whole matter is not of the Burlington railroad at Omaha The value was added, of course, to the aggregate of value and divided by the number of miles in the road and certified to the countles aceording to the number of miles in each county. Q—Now, If you added the Omaha ter- minals to the Omaha & Southwestern, which s only fifty miles long, and made & valuation of $6,500 a mile, how do you ex- plain It you took all the terminals in that you assessed that part of the road from Plattsmouth to Kearney at 310,580 a mile without any terminals of that character? A—There s a vast amount of business done over that eteh of road—ovér the main line of the Burlington. Q.—More than there is Into Omaba? A.— 1 do not pretend to say that. Q.—~The equipment all belong: Burlington, doesn't it? A.—~Yes, sir. Q~—Now, If you look back over to the prior Southwestern was assessed at mere than depot or made those extensive improve- ments down there? A.—I didn't find those facts. 1 have no recollection of it now. Q.~You didn’t find it worth $6,580 a mile In 18927 A.—No, I didn't find it. I didn't look at it to see what it was asseased at in 1892, Q—Do you know when that depot was bullt? A.—No, I can't say positively. A number of years ago, though. Q—How long ago do you think? A.— Well, my estimate Is it s five or six years Ago. Q—1In 1897 or 18987 A.—Somewhere along there, I suppose. Q.—Can you tell us for how much per mile the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy is bonded? A.—I camnot. Q.—Can you tell us how much per mile It ocked? A.—I cannot. Q--Can you tell us what its stock Is worth? A.~I cannot. Q.—Can you tell us what its bonds are worth—its 3% per cent bonds? A.—No, sir, I cannot. 8 Q—Do you know what its 7 per cent bonds, some of which are outstanding, are worth? A.—No, sir. the Chicago, Burlington & Quiney stock had all been sold and disposed of in the mar- ket and at a fixed value? A.—No, sir; I did not. You don't know now what the value of that stock is, do you? A.—I do not know. No, sir. Q.—You did not know when you made the aesessment of these different defunct cor- porations, known the Burlington now, what the value per mile of the Burlington was, and you do not know now? A.—Do you mean with reference to its stocks? Q—I mean {ts vhlue. What it would sell for in the maTket? A.—I do not know pos itively. In fixing the mileage of each one of those separate corporations that are opers ated by the Burlington road we endeavored to obtaln the fair valuation in proportion to the rest of the property in the state, or ratio of assessment. Q—What I want to know fs: before you cdn Assess any property you first must as- certaln what it is worth? A.— sir. Q—Now, I want to know from you whether when you adsessed this road or these different little corporations consti- tuting the Burlingten system, whether you know the value perianile of the Burlington railroad or whetber:you can tell the court now what it would eell for for ~ash In the market? “A.~Do you mean the éntire sys- tem? QI mean the entire a/s%m. That s, not know that In the aggregat, Q—Now, you assessed something up to the Oxford & Kansas rallroad, did you not? Yes, sir. Q.—You hardly assessed the franchise of that, did you? A.~I believe not. Q.—In fact, you don't know whether there 1s such a railroad in thé state, do you? A.— 1 think there are a few miles of it out In the southwestern. part of the state. Q—But you don’t know? A.—I have never been upon it. operating all of these and the franchise that was earning of this money was that of the Chicago, Burfington & Quincy? A.— I had reason to, think so because— Q.—The fact ia, you traveled over it and had a pass over,the entire system, aidn’'t you? A.~Certalnly [ have. There 1s no question about that. Q.—Now, did you at any stage of the pro- Ceedings assess the valuable franchise of the Chicay Burlington & Quiney In any respect? A.—That was not our intentlon to at the time, .—~And you didn't do {t? A.—No, sir. Q:—Now, what did you allow for the fran- chise of the Atchison & Nebraska? A Just stated that it was not our Intention at the time to make any assessment of the franchise. Q.—As a matter of fact, you didn't assess the value of the franchise of any rallroad in the state in making this asscsement, did you? Mf. White—I object to counsel asking a question of the witness wherein he seeks to ascertain whether or not the value of the franchise of the various raliroads in the state has bee asscesed separate and apart from the tangible property, for the reason that it {s incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, and for the further reason that under the law of our ‘state the board Is not required to assess the franchise of raflroad companles separate and apart from the tangible property., (Overruled.) A.~No, sir. Q.~If I understand you correctly, at the time you made this assessment you did not even have the statement of the earn- ings of the Burlington road for the pre- ceding year? A.—~That is apparent from the record; yes, sir. Q.—Now there {s another matter I want to inquire about. You say you went back isons with prior A.—Yes, sir. Q.—Did you know, as a matter vitally affecting railroad property, that on the 25th of January, 1900, the rallroads west of Chicago, including all of these Ne- braska roads, the roads known as the “Granger lines,” perhaps, had increased their freight rates on 240 articles of com- merce in common use 47 per cent, and it was shown for the first time in their earn- ings the following year? A.~No, sir; 1 P o e o ol & | & Omaba road, have before you a state- $6,500 a mile before they ever bullt that | Q.—Did you inquire to learn as to whether | Q.—But you knew that the road that Is| | | | | 1 | the system in Nebraska. A.—No, sir, I dfll I | mlum? 000 a mile, main 1ine and branches bome{m A now, what the terms of the ale were, Q.—~You knew, didn‘t you, that that sale to the Northern Pacific And the Great Northern had been made since you made the assessment of 19017 A.—I can't state positively now. Q—You knew that that sale was made after the assesament of two years ago and after the assessment of one year ago, didn't you?! A.—1 can't state positively that it was made after the assessment of r ago. Q—At least you knew that it was made after the assessment of two years ago? A.—Probably It was. Q.~Did you know that ae & result of the sale of that stock to the Great Northren and the Northern Pacific that the value of the Burlington stock had been imcreased 50 per cent and upward of 50 per cenmt? A.=No, sir; I didn't know It. Q.—Now, did you, at the time you sessed the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolls ment of their earnings? A.—Yes, sir. Q.—Of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapo- lis & Omaba? A.—Oh, no, I think thelr statement wasn't in. There were onhe or two that were not in at the time. Q—Did you know the amount of the common stock of that road per mile? A. No, sir; I dld not. Q.—Did you know the amount of the pre- ferred stock per mile? A.—~No, sir; I did | not. Q.=DId you know the rate of Interest that the preferred stock paid? A.—No, sir. @.~Did you kmow the premium that it commands In the market? A.—No, sir. Q.—Did you know what dividend had been pald on the common stock during the last two or three years? A.—No, sir. Q—Did you know that within the past four or five years the common stock of the road has gone from a conditlon where it pald no dividend to paylng 6 per cent dividends? A.—No, sir. Q.—Do you know the rate of Interest that the bonds of that road bear? A.—No, sir. Q.—Did you know that the bonds of that road commands more than 40 per cent pre- A.—No,. sir. Q.—You aldn’t take any of those things into consideration In assessing the value of that railroad? A.—No, sir. Q.~Which do you call the main line of the B. & M. now, or the Chicago, Burling- ton & Quiney? A.~The line from Platis- mouth to Kearney. % Q—Why do you call th A.—Simply because it has always been re- turned and assessed that way. It has been #0 recoguized for a great many years p Q.—You know the line from Hastings to Kearney is not the maine line? A.—I sup- pose that portion is not; no. And yet you assessed that road from tings to Kearney at $10,680 per mile? —Something llke that. Q—And you assessed the Omaha & Southwestern coming this way, with all the terminals, at $6,5007 A.—Well, that branch of the road from Hastings to Kearney is assessed . together with the road between Hastings and Plattsmouth. Q—Just because it has been returned that way for years? A. d over a por tion of the road between Hastings and Ash- land the Burlington road does its through business between Omaha, Chicago and Denver. Q—You know between Hastings. and Kearney there was no through business? A.—No; but the portion of the road from Hastings ‘to. Kearney has to be assessed with the rest of it. (To Be Continued.) The Peril of Our Time is lung disease. Dr. King's New Dis- covery for Consumption, Coughs and Colds cures lung trouble or no pay. b0c, $1. " to ’:a Advanced. DENVER, Colo. ity 11. Denve Rio Grande’ rafiroad ha ..523 1o ade telegraphers (rom vance in wages of I $250 to $10 per month, accarding to p tlon. The grievance committee of the tel raphers has been meeting with the officialn of the road for several weeks, and many matters have been disposed of amicably. AEEe—s—————————— ABSOLUTE SECURITY. Cenuine Carter’s Little Liver Pills. Must Boar Signature of the main line? A Wa, did npot. Q.—You did not know, then, that as & re- sult of that, the values of these prop- erties for the last two years have been immensely Increased? A.—No, sir. Q.—Didn’t these tax commissioners give you this information, tell you about this increase? A.—I think not. Q.—Did they tell you they had reclassi- fled & lot of property so as to increase the rate on it? 1 thin'c not. Q—Did they tell you tuat the Burling- ton stock had been sold to the Northern Pacific and the Great Northern for $200 & sha A.~They did not. Q.—Did you know it? A.—~I bad general foformation that a sale of that kind had been made & year or two ago. I hadn't glyen the matter great attentiof and 1 could not state positively, and clnnnll Bee Want Ads Sell on Their Merit— No free gift is necessary to make them worth the price we ssk. The Bee has the circulation ~that's why. - '~ SCHOOLS. Py Wentworth Military Academy Sifiiicrt 2 ettt e =