The Birmingham age-herald., 1914-04-08
SUIT DISMISSED
 AGAINST RAILROAD AND COAL COMPANY
Holds No Law Against Holding Stock in Distinct Corporations Engaged in
 Kindred Services

Trenton, N. |, April 7.-The United States court filed an opinion here today dismissing the suit of the United states government against the Delaware, Lack avanna and Western Railroad company ana the Delaware. Laekawanna and Western Coal company for alleged violation of the commodities clause and the sherman antitrust law. The court holds that there is no United States iaw, or decision prohibiting the same set of individuals holding stock in two dis tinct corporations. even though they may be engaged in kindred services
 The decision was handed down here by Judges Gray, Burlington and McPherson of the Third judicial circuit. The ac- ton was brought in the federal court h.re. but through a certificate of expedi- titn filed by Attorney General Mickey holds, was heard by the judges of the court of appeals at Philadelphia in Jan uary.
 Of High Importance
 The case Is considered of the highest importance by the government. as it is one of the steps planned Dy the depart mcnt of justice in it's efforts to break up what it alleges to be monopoly of the anthracite coal trade. The case which vas brought under botn the sherman antitrust law and the commodities clause of the Hepburn railrc~- law in all prob an.ity will go direct to the supreme court of the United States.
 A somewhat similar suit recently was instituted against the Lehigh Valley rail- road and it's subsidiaries in the federal court in New York and another govern ment action against the Reading. to sep arate it from the Jersey eentral rail- road and other interests Is in the United States court in Philadelphia.
 1oday's decision is the second this court has handed down in commodities clause case. The first case involved all the an t''racite roads and reached the supreme court, which decided Inat the commodi- ties clause was constitutional. but that q railroad might own stock in bona tde corporation which owns the com modity the railroad is transporting
 Extra Dividend
 After the supreme court decision the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad company declared an extra div idend of 20 per cent and the stockholders were given the option to use half of the dividend to purchase stock of the Dela- wae, Lacllawanna and Western Coal company, which was organized to take ever the marketing of the railroads coal
 The railroad made contract to sell its coal to the new coal company on the basis of 65 per cent of the average price received for anthracite at New York tideWater. Under this contract the railroad, which continues to mine the coal from the land it owns, sells it at tue mine to the coal company and the railroad transports it for the coal cor poration.
 The government attacked this arrange ment as a mere lawyers device, cloak lfS old facts under new fictions' that II was mere subterfuge and fraud un- der the law and the public" and that each corporation is in fact the sams group or body of actual persons work ing to the sam end under different names"
 The governments contention in the suit was that the Delaware. Lackawanna and Western Railroad company and the Della ware, bachawanna and Western Coal company were virtually one corporation ana that they were violating the law for the reason that the Delaware. Lackawan- na and Western Railroad company was admittedly engaged in transporting over Its lines large quantity of coal shipped by the Delaware, Lackawanna and West ern Coal company.
 It was admitted at the hearing that stock of the coal company was largely 1T not entirely, owned ivy stockholders or the railroad. but it was contended on a f.f
 was bona i1de distinction between the two companies. while it was contended on the part or the government that the main tanning of the two companies with the stock of the coal company was a subter- fuge to evade liability under the statute prohibiting coal company from carry ing goods manufactured, mined or pro- duced by itself
 No Formal Charge
 The opinion filed goes extensively into former decisions in the United States su companies with other companies were in- volved. It is pointed out that after thes, decisions. which were adverse to the de. fendants. the Delaware Lackawanna and Western Railroad company, which at the time owned the stocks of the Delaware Lackawanna and Western Coal company placed the stocks of the coal company on the market. giving preference in the sale of such stocks to the stockholders cf the railroad company. This method of ths railroad company in divesting itself of tha stock of the coal company is held in to- days opinion to have been substantial compliance with the decisions in the for