Norwich bulletin., 1914-12-22
Government Loses
 Monopoly Suit
AGAINST THE LEHIeH VALLEY
 ROAD AND OTHERS.
CASE WAS DISMISSED
By Judge Charles NJ. Housh in the United States District Court at Nss York-pepartment of Justice Off, eisIs at Washington Surprised at Finding.

New York, Dec. 21-The govern ment's Sherman law monopoly suit against the Lehigh Valley Railroad company and a number of other de- fendants engaged in the mining and transportation of anthracite coal was dismissed by Judge Charles M. Hough In the United States district court here today
 No Monopoly Shown.
 Judge Hough in dismissing the suit said:
 No monopoly of interstate conn merce, nor any attempt to monopo- l1zes Is shown. The proof of the pud- ding is in the eating thereof and if IS impossible to find any of the normal results of monopoly without also find Ing violations of the commodities clause. and none Is discovered. As to the restraint of interstate trade in coals transported oyer the Lehigh railroad, there can be no restraint without control. and since the railroad does not control the coal it carries it has no means of restraint.
 Other Defendant Corporations,
 Besides the Lehigh Valley Railroad company. the governments complaint named the Lehigh Valley Coal com pany, Lehigh Valley Coal Sales corn- pany, CoXe Brothers & company, Inc, Delaware, Susquehanna and Schuyl- XII Railroad company, New York and Middle Coal Field Railroad and Coal company. G. B. Markle company, Girard Trust company, Eben B. Thomas and numerous other officers Of the defendant corporations The suit, Judge Hough stated in his decision. is one chapter in a Itiga- ! ton against anthracite coal owners and carriers which has now extended over many years and become history. Referring to the governments ale gation that the commodities clause" ! of the Hepburn act of 1906 had been violated, Judge Hough called attention to the Lackawanna Coal Sales case, and continued:
 Statement by Judge Housh.
 50 far as the commodities clause is concerned, I shall dismiss it with the statement that there is no great dif- | ference between what the Lackawanua railroad did and was upheld in doing ! by all the judges of the Third circuit i and what the Lehigh Valley railroad has been doing, as shown in this case If there be any material differences, they tend to strengthen the position of the Lehigh as compared with that | of the Lackawanna; for the Lacka- wanna owned outright much if not most of the coal long transported over its own lines, whereas the Lehigh Valley owned the stock Of other cor porations which under the laws of Pennsylvania, had good right to own the lands and mine and sell tic coal. the transportation whereof has given rise to so much litigation"
 Washington Justice Officials Surprised Washington, Dec. 1.-Department ! of justice officials here apparently were not greatly surprised when they heard of the dismissal of the Lel1igh case.
 An appeal will be taken from Judge Hough's decision and an effort made ! to have the case before the supreme court this term. The necessity of pre- pairing brief of the record in the case. however, may consume so much time that the case cannot be decided by the supreme court until next year.