New-York tribune., 1906-06-17
GAS ORDER PERMANENT.
Lozeer Rate Enjoined TIL Final
Hearing of Case.

The final order in the Consolidated Gas Company
case restraining the enforcement of the SOcept gas
law was handed down yesterday by Judge La
combe in the United States Circuit Court previous
orders having been merely temporary. The final
order said. in part:
e ee bo of the n fd 3 pee n9 @
final hearing and disposition of this case thereat.
The payment by the defendant, the city OF New
the rate of IS cents a thousand cubic feet, and
ceptance thereof by the complainant under protest
shah not operate as an accord satisfaction waiver
or estoppel the prejudice of either party in any
Of any unreasonable delay on the part of the com
plainant in the prosecution of this suit, the de
for order suspendins this injunction
Attorney General Mayer. Charles E. Hughes and
State Senator Alfred n. Page, representing the de-
PENDANTS. and John A. Garner, representing the
gas company. called on Judge Lacombe during the
day and submitted the proposed orders and Mr..
Mayer and Mr. Hughes asked the court to modify
the restraining order signed week on which
the final order signed yesterday, but the court
refused to do so. and handed down the memorandum
opinion stating that 1t better continue the
former order because had been fully construed by
the court itself. and there could be doubt to
its meaning.
ITO undertake to express the same IDEAS" Judge
Laoombe said, in different words. would result in
the entry of another order which might itself have
to be construed. Orders similar to this may be
prepared in the other cases.
Mr.. Mayer, Mr.. Jerome and the three members
of the State Gas and Electricity Commission as de-
PENDANTS against the Standard Gas Light Company
filed their answers with the United States Circuit
Court yesterday. The STANDARD Gas Light Com
pany asks to restrain the enforcement OF the 80
cent law practically the grounds alleged
by the Consolidated Gas Company. the parent
ganiza ton, in it's suit against the state and
county officials. The answers deny the investment
of the Standard company. exclusive OF the fran
chises is worth $4,000 and say that 1t does not
exceed the value of ST. 10000 and that despite the
the franchises of the complainant are assessed
at 81 a670000 such valuation should be considered
as part of the company's investment. The an
close by denying that the S0-cent gas law
deprives the complainant OF Its property rights
without due process of law. and prays that the
bill OF the complainant be dismissed.
Answers were also filed by the state, county and
State Gas Commission the suit instituted by
Peter Reid and Sarah ]. Barry against them
defendants with the Mutual Gas Company code
fendant In this action the two compIainants al
lege they are owners of 100 and $50 shares OF the
capital stock of the Mutual company, and that
from enforcing and the Mutual Gas Company from
complying with the S-cent gas law the latter cor
poratiop will be unable to sufficient dividend
to pay Its stockholders the profit they are Justly
entitled TO by reason of their investment.
The filed that Mutual co,nnanU
has retained in its treasury all its net Drohts In
excess of the per dividend IL paid the stock-
holders as an alleged reserve for depreciation
that the sum so retained had reference 20 the
actual loss or value and really retained by the
ton provided for in Section cited to eyads
and defeat the purpose of the