New-York tribune., 1909-01-05
CONSOLIDATED ISSUES STATEMENT.

CONSOLIDATED ISSUES STATEMENT.
various constructions were placed the courts
ruling owing to the fact that the details were lack
ing 1t was conceded by all counsel, however lnat
II meant SO-cent gas as the manoate was
handed down unless the Consolidated took steps
to hold up the statute pending a rehearing or tne
case as the decision gives that right The lawyers
for the Consolidated Gas Company, James NJ Beck
John A. Carver and Charles F. Matthewson' gave
out the following statement late last night:
discussion of the decision is somewhat pren1a-
ture until we have the full text of the opinion II
gstained the Consolidated Gas Company in most
of its principal contentious Thus the SuPree ta
franshsef and sDg tBs 5ecsion ems
pPsgy permits further proceedings to determine
he te'1 1confscatorg character of the law the Con
ff ID Gfs he true % value Of its
70 The n iGqFf retn nT@ Of per cent upon the value Of s
m property. as contended for by it The city and and
oWer,ess to interfere If the permitted at least
to per cent but the Supreme Court eaVe5 b,nS nE
it permits the company can establish that lt re-
ceived less than per cent the statute Wouio Dc
I9other point of great importance is the ruling
present value OF its property and is not restricted
to its original cost The court mas as4 a9d
has 1nvalidated the cumulative Penaites i, VIE tba
gas companys favor. it is given the opportunity to
establish by the actusl results OF m tHe 3
that such rate yields less than per upon the
sns ao doubt as to its ability to establish this
the satisfaction OF the court and the public
p p WHITNEY ON DECISION.
F 2 Whitney. who argued the at Washing
ton as special counsel for the Public Service Com
r,;eson when his attention called to that part
of the decision which says: As II might possibly
he that ractical experience of the effect of the act
b,, actual operation might prevent the complainant
from obtaining fair and just return upon its prop
critics used in this business of supplying gas the
oon,nIanant in that event ought to have the oppor-
tnity of again presenting this case in the courts
Therefore The decree is reversed with the direction
TO dismiss the bill without prejudice said that the
record of the case looked to him as II the company
had left no stone unturned in the litigation just
decided. and gave indication that 1t could make
a better showing another trial He added;
..Dismissing the bill without prejudice is a very
familiar term and means that neither party Is
bound by the decision any question OF fact' IN
oaee ~ neu, litigation In this it that
the gas company did not succeed In making outfits
o,a,r, that the so-cent law unconstitutional
when it was passed. but that it is at hbertS to
prove that under present circumstances, 1t has
become
whether the rulings that the rate OF interest
should be per cent and the franchise allowance
at laast s77s1 600 will control upon future trial
will he better understood when we get the full text
of the oninion The latter ruling seems to me 10
bA based upon a misapprehension of the evidence
as to the origin of the 81, $1,000 item -,
LAS TO the city. the opinion seems TO show that
| T,,1U should
his own figures, for the 75cent law apPlica 6le to
| CITY gas was passed the year before the So-cent
Void I% 1e the earlier law would operate to reduce
me he1 seems really to be no decision the
| nenalties except that the penalty clause Is sepa-
rabe from the rest of the act. The state admitted
that the penalty clause would be unconstitutional If
Judge Hough put the right construction on it, but
disavowed any such construction. The court rules
! that there must be enough pressure TO maintain
% candle power but adds the provision restricting
/ the maximum pressure to be unconstitutional
| dThe Injunction obtained by the company will
stand for few days, until the mandate comes
down from Washington. Then sloent gas will pre-
vail until the company show that II did not put
its case in right that conditions have changed
The passages printed to-day do not indicate whether
there is anything in the opinion bearing directly on
/ the cases Of the other companies
SWEEPING VICTORY FOR CITY"
William P Burr Assistant Corporation Counsel,
who was in the thick OF the hsht for so-cent gas
said Yesterday that as read the decision it was
a sweeping victory for the city But he said that
nothing more definitely than that could be said
about it until the full text was forthcoming.
Everything the city has contended for has been
upheld" Mr. Burr said.
In commenting on the relationship between tne
cit,y and the gas companies he said that the city
had maid no gas bill since 1902 owing to the htga-
tion the fight for the city having been started IN
Mavor Lows administration The companies
fought the 75-cent law and II will now have 10 he
determined how much the city owes the COM
panies Mr.. Burr said ne was pretty sure 'ha'
the Consolidated would make no turther hght
The consolidated paid in the 20 cents excess
tight along until October Ia last. but II said
thai the money collected in OF the s0-cent
rate since than would be promptly Forthcoming