The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-05-04
COAL ROADS ARE
 NOF AFFECTED
Lawyers Give Opinion of the
 Courr Decision
TWO ROADS ARE INVOLVED
Reading and Delaware, Lackawana and Western Are the Roads Most Affected by the Decision
 Given by Judge White.

New York. May S.-That the coal-carry- ing roads will be practically unaffected in their business by the decision of the su- preme court in the commodities clause, is the. opinion of Robert w. DeForest of this city, who was assisted with John J. Johnson of Pennsylvania as counsel for the companies in the argument of the cases before the court Only in the case of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Vest ern Railroad company will change in ] business methods be necessary because of the decision, is MT. DeForests belief and this is not in way to hamper the com pany for any length of time in the handling of it's coal products.
 MT. Der crest made the following state ment:
 Practically the decision of the supreme court is in favor of the railroads, and the public and against the contention of the Attorney General that all coal mined by the railroads which had a direct own ership in the coal and that all coal mines by subsidiary coal companies in which the railroad companies had a stock, it was barred from interstate transportation by the Hepburn act.
 of the anthracite carriers, only two, the Delaware. Laczawanna and Western and the Delaware and Hudson had any di- rect legal ownership in anthracite coal. Both these companies are authorized by their charters to mine anthracite coal and to transport it.
 "All the other so-called anthracite car riers, that is the Reading, the Central Railroad of New Jersey, the Pennsyl- tho ioh No1la he Erie and the New York, Ontario and Western own stock in coal mining com panies.
 The decision establishes the legality of coal transportation by these six last named.
 This leaves only the situation of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western and the Delaware and Hudson to be practi- cally considered.
 '"The supreme court decides that tlSe prohibition of the Hepburn act does not apply when title to a commodity though manufactured, mined or produced by railroad company or under it's authority, has passed out of that railroad company in good faith before the act of transpor- tation begins
 The Delaware and Hudson company, as I understood. at the present and for some time past, has been accustomed to sell it's coal at the mines. Therefore the prohibition of the act, under the decision of the supreme court would not apply to it. It would apply to the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western under what I understood to be it's present course of business, but it would seem quite possi- ble for that company to adopt the prac- tices of the Delaware and Hudson com pany or equally possible for that com pany to transfer it's coal lands to an- other company, the stock of which can be held by it.
 William S. Jenney vice president and general counsel of the Delaware, Lack awanna and Western Railroad company, said:
 ''The decision of the supreme court d- recty affects our company. The Lack awanna owns it's coal properties directly and although I have not seen the com plete decision it is apparent that the Del aware, Lackawanna and Western will have to divest itself of the legal own ership of these properties and form a separate company to take them over.
 ''Whether after this company is formed the stock will be issued to the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western shareholders or whether the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western will own the stock as a corpora tion will depend upon the terms of the decision
 T do not think we would consider the formation of a holding company similar to that of the Reading, to hold the stock of the railroad and the coal companies both.
 Tt seems to me there must be some joker in that decision somewhere that will put a different light on this ques- tion of direct and indirect ownership"