The successful adoption of this policy on the part of the railway-managers and other captains of industry has had one curious effect which was not contemplated by the originators of the movement, and which brings us to the second influence mentioned above as having tended to obscure the distinction between bonds and stocks. When a case has been brought before the courts in which the contention was advanced that the charges of the railway or public-service corporation were too high, the courts appear to have taken the ground that stocks and bonds should be classed together in order to determine the aggregate capitalization of the company, and that the justice or injustice of the contention that the charges are too high should be determined by ascertaining whether if the charges were made lower the net earnings would still be sufficient to pay a fair return on the total capital invested. This is the general line of reasoning pursued by the courts, both in the case of the Consolidated Gas Company in New York and the Pennsylvania Railroad in Pennsylvania. The effect of this attitude on the part of the courts has been to obscure still more greatly the real distinction between bonds and stocks. It is too early as yet to judge what will be the final outcome of the changed attitude toward stocks, but it can not be doubted that the present tendency of opinion on the subject, so far as large corporations are concerned, is to limit the return on stocks to a strictly investment basis, instead of leaving the stockholders free to reap all possible profit from their business venture subject to the restraints of competition. The adoption of this attitude by the courts should be a matter for serious consideration on the part of present and prospective stockholders. If the maximum return on stock is to be limited to 6 per cent, or any fair investment basis, and charges reduced to consumers so that they obtain the benefit of any greater earning power, it would appear that the stockholders occupy an undesirable position. With their possible profits limited, but with no fixt return insured to them and no guaranty against possible loss, it can not be held that the purchase of stock seems attractive. These questions, however, will doubtless be settled in the long run in justice both to the public and to the stockholders, and in the meantime the stocks of our large and successful railway and industrial corporations, which have attained a certain stability and permanence of value, are entitled to consideration when investments are contemplated. It is not worth while to lay down rules for judging the investment value of such stocks, because the general principles advanced in the preceding chapters will be found sufficient for a judgment of their values.