Names and addresses of legatees omitted, as they are not given in the

SUMMARY STATEMENT OF THE EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF JOHN DOE, WHO DIED JANUARY 15, 1901.

I, Richard Doe, executor, charge myself, as follows:

With amount of Inventory..

$11,698.50

With net increase, as shown by Schedule A....... 72.58

$11,771.08

I credit myself, as follows:

With expenses, as per schedule C..............
With payments to creditors, as per schedule D.....
With advances and final payments made to legatees
in accordance with the will as per schedule E...
With commissions deducted by myself.....

$666.00
131.50

10,665.87
307.71

$11,771.08

(This problem can also be solved by the Charge and Discharge method as adopted in many States; this one, however, is solved in accordance with the requirements of the Surrogates, in the County of New York.)

STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF THE FIRM OF BROWN & JONES, DECEMBER 31, 1902.

BALANCE SHEET OF THE FIRM OF BROWN & JONES,

COMMENTS.

The two problems, if taken as representatives, disclose the difference in standard of requirements of the respective boards, in 1903.

The only comments worth making on the New York problem is that the data furnished in the problem are rather incomplete for an intelligent solution of the questions asked.

With regard to the make up of the Illinois problem, we notice that the Board asks us to keep the old traditional Merchandise Account. They further show all facts agglomerated and not properly classified. The problem is rather of a bookkeeping than of an accounting nature, and the information given is not only incomplete, but misleading.

With regard to solutions:

In solving the New York problem, the principles and forms, as suggested by Prof. Hardcastle in his Accounts of Executors and Trustees were observed.

In the solution of the Illinois problem the exact answers, as they are required by the Board, are given, although some of them are rather superfluous; viz.: There is no necessity for both a Statement of Assets and Liabilities and a Balance Sheet.

The profits and losses were distributed according to the capital invested and the time that such capital was employed, using the average method. On another page of THE JOURNAL the reader will find such rules worked out in detail.

The item of Notes Receivable Discounted was arrived at by an analysis and verification of the Cash Balance, as given. Unless there were some other Cash Receipts, in addition to those mentioned, there would be a debit instead of a credit balance, which is hardly possible. It must follow that some of the Notes Receivable were discounted, a sufficient amount ($7,556) to prove the balance shown in the problem.

New York State Society Meeting.

The annual meeting of the New York State Society was held at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel on Monday evening, May 11, when the following officers were unanimously elected: President, John R. Loomis; first vicepresident, Henry R. M. Cook; second vice-president, Edward L. Suffern; secretary, Samuel D. Patterson; treasurer, William F. Weiss; directors, Franklin Allen, Francis R. Clair, E. Y. Gallaher, Duncan MacInnes, H. A. Niles, E. W. Sells, Leon Brummer, Hamilton S. Corwin, Francis Gottsberger, Leon O. Fisher, Alfred Rose, Charles E. Sprague.

The under-named gentlemen were appointed as a committee to make the necessary arrangements for holding the reception to be tendered to the members, delegates, visitors and friends of The American Association of Public Accountants at the Marlborough-Blenheim Hotel, Atlantic City, N. J., on the evening of October 21, 1908: J. R. Loomis, William F. Weiss, C. F. Ludlam, Francis How, Franklin Allen, Francis Gottsberger, A. W. Teele, Samuel D. Patterson, Leon Brummer.

The Journal of Accountancy

Published Monthly under the auspices of the
American Association of Public Accountants

Vol. 6

JUNE, 1908

Railroad Accounting Under Government
Supervision.*

BY M. P. BLAUVELT,

Comptroller of the Erie Railroad.

No. 2

To supervise means more than to merely oversee; it means to oversee with authority to direct or regulate. Having this in view, I should prefer to confine my remarks to the advisory work which has been performed by your Committee on Corporate, Fiscal and General Accounts, as well as by the Association in its entirety, and leave practically altogether out of consideration many points concerning which there has been much said and written on the subject of the advisability of government supervision, the scope of such supervision, the question as to whether government supervision retards railroad progress and many other kindred subjects. It does not, however, prevent me from giving a brief history of how your Committee on Corporate, Fiscal and General Accounts came to be appointed and the work which it has done, particularly in view of the criticisms that have been made on this subject.

My understanding of the matter is, that just prior to the meeting of this Association at Bluff Point, in June, 1906, the Interstate Commerce Act (as amended), popularly known as the "Hepburn Bill," was passed by both Houses of Congress, and the bill seemed certain to be signed by the President-in fact, was approved on June 29, 1906, the last day of our meeting. As one of our members had received an intimation from officials of *An address delivered before the Association of American Railway Accounting Officers, April, 1908.