upr000283 202

end result of the order was found to be reasonable. ’’Following this decision the trend toward the cost base swept through and fairly engulfed the industry as well as regulatory bodies. In times of comparatively stable prices corresponding in general production, it is relatively unimportant tow hectoshte r ofo rriegi­nal cost or present fair value be adopted. Surely the ori­goif naald micnoisstt rtahteioorny,' cboumtm ednudsr inigt seilnff lbayt iosnhaereyr pseirmipoldisc iitty assumes' alarming aspects and it may equally prove to be alarming during'a period of deflation. From our tvwieeewpno itnhte, fhuonwdeavmeern,t alw e phcialnonosto phiyn duolf get hei n orai gicnhaoli cec osbte­loine vteh e thoanet whea ndar ea ndd irfeacitre dv,a luneo t ono nltyhe by otthhee r.l egWies ­be­lative, but by the Supreme Court, in the course which we are to pursue upon this phase of this troublesome oquure stSiuopnr.e me InC ouortth erh awvoer dtso,l db oust ht hoautr wlee giasrle attou reo^paenrda te upon the basis of fair value. ”0ur decision upon this subject must, by no means be taken as discarding the soundness of original cost for accounting purposes, nor are we discarding original sciosdte reasd ia n vedreyt erimmiponritnagn tt hea nudl tviimtaatle elqeumeesntti ont o ofbe thceon­fair value of the property. ”As we see it, the determination of fair value is a matter of judgment. It is to be exercised by the Commission after giving lawful consideration to all the' various elements entering into the formation of a sound, fraeiasro nvaablluee, oafn tdh ei nptrelolpiegretnyt ofj utdhgem enutt ilais tyto ustheed panrde seunste ­ful in its business. ”We are considering this question at a time in the eicnogn otmhei c mohsits tvoiroyl eonft thiinsf lactoiuonntarryy w hpeenr iwoed oafr e ouerx pneartiieonnca­l leirftey. of Tthhe ise vuitdienlciet y shhaovwes tbheaetn tchoen stfrauccitleidt ieasn d anadc qpuirroepd­over a period upwards of thirty-five years and it is^ incredible that fair value measured in 1949 dollars is not in excess of the original cost of construction or acquisition. 'If it is worth anything more than its ionriinggi naitls cposrte,s enitt wnoerctehs,s awrei lya ref oldleopwasr titnhga t firnom deotreirgim­­nal cost as the sole criterion of value.” In the case of Indiana Bell Telephone Co., decided