it was contended that "All Other Property" included franchise values. This is not deemed important, because it is difficult to see wherein steam railroad properties, like those involved, can have a franchise value. But waiving that, any franchise value that the state board could have considered was necessarily so small a per cent. of the total valuations fixed by the state board as to make no appreciable difference in the result of these cases, because, if altogether admitted, the remaining value is such that no road could obtain a return to which it is herein found to be entitled. But if the property has a franchise value for taxation, it also has such valuation as an earning power, or, rather, upon which returns should be made. In fixing the valuations above set forth, there have been considered the immense terminal values of most of the roads, the amount of stock and bouds outstanding, what it would cost to duplicate the properties both with and without terminals in the large cities, and all the evidence bearing on present values, and in fixing said valuations the sums found are the minimum valuations, the properties being worth at least the sums thus fixed. The foregoing valuations are the same as fixed by the state assessing boards except as to the property of the St. Louis & Hannibal and of the Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield in the state, which are found to be worth 66% per cent. of the valuations of the state boards. (12) The interest obligations, except as already stated, are just and reasonable, and should be paid in full, with some dividends to the stockholders in addition. However, and entirely aside from the question of interest, the rates and earnings should in any event be such as to produce a fair return upon the valuations hereinbefore fixed. And such earnings should be on the property within the state as would be equivalent to 6 per cent. per annum, that per cent. being a fair return upon such valuations. (13) About the same time the two-cent fare statute became operative, passes and other forms of reduced and free transportation were abolished. Since that time they have not been given nor used except in cases of employés actually employed. The passenger earnings were thereby increased, but such increase was not more than approximately 1 per cent. (14) After the arguments were concluded, at the request of the court, and with the consent of the parties, two experts upon each side, two selected by the railways and two by the defendants, worked with the court for something more than one week. These experts were the same gentlemen representing their respective sides who had done much of the work in preparing the cases for the respective sides for hearing. The court requested these experts to take the numerous tables and tabulate them already in evidence, and to confine themselves wholly to that which had been introduced in evidence in the cases, and to make therefrom a new table for each of the nine cases, showing the earnings and the expenses chargeable to each class of earnings according to the respective theories covered by counsel in the arguments. The court further requested said four experts, after preparing said new tables, that if they agreed, to affix their signatures thereto. This they did below a certificate reciting that the statement of earnings, operating expenses, etc., as to each particular road for the time therein given, correctly shows the results on the various assumptions set forth therein. Said nine statements were by order of this court, February 20, 1909, ordered filed and made of record in the cases. The said nine statements are now and here referred to, and are made part hereof. Each of said nine statements is found by the court to be correct upon the respective theories presented. But the theory entitled as the "state's basis" is rejected for the reason that said statement improperly divides miscellaneous earnings, placing an undue proportion to the benefit of the state. And said basis improperly makes a division of expense upon the ton mile and passenger mile basis, and does not allow a sufficient amount as extra cost of doing state business, and the same does not allow enough for the value of the property, in that it deducts all sums included “All Other Property" multiplied by three. If the companies had been permitted to charge the amounts per passenger per mile which they did charge and receive prior to the two-cent passenger fare statute, they would have received, in addition to that which they did receive by reason of the statute, and by reason of the temporary injunction being denied, for earnings within the state for a period of 12 months last preceding the submission of the cases, the following sums (Interstate, however, not controlled by statute, but by changed conditions): In the case of the St. Louis & San Francisco, there were included in expenses sums paid as rentals under a lease given by the Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railway Company, whose common stock is owned by it, which operates the company under a lease requiring it to pay to the holders of preferred stock of the Fort Scott & Memphis Company, as a rental, a sum equal to 4 per cent. annual dividends. This lease has been in force several years and is a fair one, and such rental has been treated as an operating expense, and is not included in fixed charges. And the court finds that it is an operating expense. But even if it were a fixed charge, it is not material, as the result would not be changed even though the rentals were carried into the fixed charge account. This is so because the amounts carried into state freight expense is only $8,428.56, and interstate passenger expense, $7,443.68. (15) In the statements hereinbefore referred to made and signed by the four experts, while they correctly set forth the figures on both the revenue theory and the ton and passenger mile theory, the placing of the miscellaneous earnings of the passenger business is arbitrarily fixed, and does not at all proceed upon the passenger mile basis, but for that the revenue basis is taken and fixed. Such earnings are arbitrarily divided without reference to the facts, the result being the state earnings, and especially passenger, are fixed much higher than the actual earnings. Said division, instead of following defendants' theory of the ton mile and passenger mile basis, is upon the revenue basis, from which it is seen that this would be a splitting of theories. But from this and from all the evidence it is plain that even the ton and passenger mile basis theory cannot be worked out without showing a loss, to prevent which an arbitrary change of account must be made as to the miscellaneous business. Even in making this arbitrary change the revenue basis is used, and yet the revenue division of expenses insisted upon by complainants is said not to be recognized. This is utterly illogical and unfair, and does not represent the true facts as to whether such earnings are made at a loss, and there is no reliance whatever to be placed in such method of accounting. In so finding, no reflection whatever is made upon the experts for the state, because, as before found, they are men of the highest character and learning and highly skilled in accounting, and with a proper basis for such accounting their work is perfect. And from their own statements upon the basis adopted herein for making such accounting by the court, the freight business for the period mentioned would have been done at a loss if the statutory rates had been observed, and the passenger business was done at a loss under the two-cent fare statute. (16) As to each of the nine companies whose cases have been submitted, the earnings and expenses and all other items are different in amount. So with the returns upon value to which the company is entitled. But in no event in any of the cases tried would the freight earnings, after making the deductions herein found, result in a return to any company of more than 3 per cent. With nearly every company an actual deficit is shown, if the 1907 statute had been in force. So under the two-cent fare statute a deficit as to nearly all of the companies, and not more than 2 per cent. in case of any company. If the freight and passenger business should be combined with the miscellaneous of each class, there would be a deficit as to some, and not to exceed 3 per cent. as to any of the others. In arriving at these conclusions, and in adopting the tabulations herein set forth, an account has been taken of all earnings, state and interstate, freight and passenger, and miscellaneous; the proportion which state and interstate freight and passenger, exclusive of miscellaneous, bear to all state and interstate, miscellaneous included, and that which they bear to all the earnings of the state; of miscellaneous freight and miscellaneous passenger earnings, undivided as between state and interstate, with the proportion they are of all earnings, freight and passenger; of all expenses divided as between all kinds of freight and passenger business, including miscellaneous, but not divided as between state and interstate; of the deductions to be made from all state freights, not including miscellaneous, of such proportion of expenses of all freight and passenger respectively as the freight and passenger earnings, exclusive of miscellaneous, bear to all earnings; of the deduction of the extra cost; of the diminution of freight earnings if the freight rate statute had been observed; of the value of that portion of the property assignable to the particular traffic. This value is found by tak ing, for each class of business of the entire value of the property in the state, such proportion as the earnings on that portion of the business bear to all the earnings in the state. A statement so made as to each of the companies whose cases have been submitted is as follows: (17) The periods taken are representative taken by the experts upon both sides, and were for the months set forth in the column headed "Time." These tables do not follow the form taken by the experts in preparing exhibits to be introduced in evidence, nor do they follow the prepared form adopted by the four experts in making the nine statements hereinbefore referred to. An attempt has been made to abbreviate, but with the results the same as adopted by the experts. These are found to be correct as now to be set forth, and are adopted by the court. If any error has crept into them, the court will make proper correction upon his attention being called thereto after these findings have been filed, which can be readily done upon motion or suggestion. tables adopted by the court now follow: The |