Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Bilag - XIX. Uddrag af Vidneforklaringer, afgifne i den af Underhuset i Anledning af Telegrafbillen nedsatte specielle Komité
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
1983. Do you mean to tell me that 20
years’ value of property of this kind is not re
garded as an equiv.alent to a perpetuity in tke
purchase? — I am not aware that it is.
1984. Surely you must know something
about these things; in purchasing trades of this
kind if you give 20 years’ value for a trade, do
you not give wbat is equivaleut to giving 20
years’ purchase for land? — Jf you wish it 1
will admit it to you; I uiould say that I do not
consider that a property, part of which has 10
years to run, and another part undoubtedly håving
30 years to run, and the whole being subject to
creat risks, was worth a perpetual annuity equal
to the present prcfts. That was the vieio 1 took;
I may have been wrong, but that is the vie v
1 took.
1985. But did you consider that in the
case of the inland railways, the term over such
a system as the London and North Western
Eailway of seven or eight years was worth 20
years’ purchase? — There was not the exireme
element of risk in that case; and 1 have no ren
son whatcver to suppose but tvhat itwould be per
fectly possible to make a satisfaciory arrangement
with t e railways; and all that 1 have seen has
convinced me that it is possible, and before that
time arrives, whatever the time may be, 1 have-no
reason to suppose fat we shall be on a ivorse
footing with the railways than ivith the Telegrnph
Companies.
1986. What in the world has that to do
with the case of giving a lessee 20 years’ pur
chase for his term; the fact is, that you may
hope and expect to arrange with the landlord,
on the expiration of the term, but you are giving
for the term of eight years 20 years’ purchase?
— les, 7 do grant that, but al the cxpiration of
trose years 1 should still stand in the shoes of the
tenant whom 1 have ousted.
1987. Paying nothing for renewal? — No,
there tvould not be that payment.
1988. Still the financial basis upon which
you proceeded with regard to the purchase of
the inland Telegraph Companies was 20 years’
1983. Er det Deres Mening at sige mig, at
20 Aars Yærdi af denne Slags Eieidom ikke be
tragtes som en Æqvivalent for en stedsevarende
Eiendomsret? — Jeg ved ikke, om det er saa.
1984. De maa da vist vide Noget om disse
Ting; naar De ved Kjøb af denne Slags Forret
ninger giver 20 Aars Yærdi for en Forretning,
giver De da ikke hvad der er æqvivalent med
at give 20 Aars Kjøb for Land? — Dersom De
ønsker det, vil jeg indrømme det for Dem ; jeg
vilde sige, at jeg ikke er af den Mening, at en
Eiendom, hvoraf en Del har 10 Aar at løbe, og
en anden utvivlsomt 30, medens det Hele er udsai
for store Eisikoer, var værd en stedsevarende
annuity. Ug de nuværende Jndlcegter. Det var fra
den Betragtning, jeg gik ud; jeg kan have taget feil,
men det er den Betragtning, fra hvilkenjeg gik ud.
1985. Men antog De, at betræffende de
indenlandske Jernbaner en Termin paa syv eller
otte Aar over et saadant System som London og
North-Western Jernbane var værd 20 Aars Kjøb?
— Der vyr i dette Tilfælde ikke den overor
denfige Eisiko tilstede, og jeg har ingen<omhelst
Grund til at antage Andet, end at det vilde være
fuldkommen muligt at traiffe en tilfredsstillende
Overenskomst med Jernbanerne; og Alt, hvad ]eg
har seet, har overbevist mig om, at det er muligt,
og før den Tid kommer, hvilken den end kan
blive, har jeg ingen Grund til at antage, at vi
skulle komme til at staa paa en slettere Fod med
Jernbanerne end med Telcgrafkompagnierne.
1986. Hvad i al Verden har det at bestille
med den Sag at give en Forpagter 20 Aars Kjøb
for hans Termin? Tingen er, at De kan haabe
og vente at træffe Overenskomst med Eieren ved
Udløbet af Terminen, men De giver jo for en
Termin af otte Aar 20 Aars Kjøb? — Ja, jeg
indrømmer det; men efter Udløbet af disse Aar
skulde jeg fremdeles staa paa samme Fod, som
den Forpagter, som jeg har drevet ud.
1987. Og ikke betale Noget for Fornyelse?
— Nei, der vilde ikke blive saadan Betaling.
1988. Dog var den financielle Basis, hvor
paa De gik frem med Hensyn til Kjøbet af de
indenlandske Telegrafkompagnier, 20 Aars Kjøb
172 [ Bil. XIX.
BILAG.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
