The daily banner. (Cambridge, Md.) 1897-2008, 1922-02-03
COAL TAX UPHELD
IN OAUPH|N COURT
Revenue a'Sing Bill Declared
Constitutional.
PROMPT APPEAL EXPECTED

Court Adopts the View That Anthra-
cite and Bituminous Coal Are Diff
ferent Commodities.
Harrisburg, Feb. 3.-Constitution.
stlity of the anthracite tax law of 1921,
the major revenue act Of the last
Legislative session and counted upon to
add millions to the income of the COM
monwealth, was upheld by the Dau-
phin county court.
The decision is signed by the three
judges sitting as chancellorS, and goes
eXhauStively into the arguments heard
late last year and the litigation over
the similar act of 1913, declared I'M
constitutional by the state supreme
court
Steps for cOlircGiun oi' the tax OF
| p per cent il. yaiUrcAI tor the last
half of 1921 rave been III progress ut
the auditOur generals department, the
hlanr,> for The reports having been
SEM ouI some time ago, and the tax
will he collected unit! IN appeal, which
il Is reported will be taken by the
r"lni:aiHants. is made ii supersedras
I'll" period for coal cuinpaEics to re-
port their production expired on Janu.
AIRY %, but the auditor general !, ON,
powered to grant a tifteen-day exten-
son. which will be done.
The action decided was laurchcI -
tie form of Il bill in equity to restrain
assessment and collection Of the tax
by officers of the Thomas Cnlirrr
company, the auditor general AMI
state treasurer, the pI;tinti, hrir.: $50
'a"d {. Heis!rr. of philadelphia. !.
shareholder tho cr,upaLy.
Attorney General George +. Alter
argued the case for lie comment
wealth.. The coat iaN law occupied
inucii attention in the last session and
i'"op.e connected with coal companies
predicted ut the tina" Of It's passl@,,
prolonged ntis"1.on t" TEST rcn-f:!u
tionality
In the decision the court adopts the
view that anthracite and bituminOus
coal are different commodities.
President Judge William NJ largest
in his opinion said, in part:
I'VE find that anthracite coal differs
rom bitumirOus coal in its physical
properties, nLmely, the amount OF fix
ed carbon, the amount Of volatile mat
ter, color, luster and structural charac-
ter.
THE percentage of fixed carbon in
on o,,it t. &c ,oI,
centage of volatile matter much low
er than in bituminous coal. Anthra-
cite coal is hard, compact and COM
paratively clean and free from dust,
while bituminous coal is softer, dusty
and dirty. Defendants fifth request
or finding of fact)
The fuel rate of Luminous coal
differs from that of anthracite coal
The fuel ratio of bituminous coal rises
as the coal is more soft, while the fuel
ate of anthracite coal rises as the
coal is more hard. Defendants sixth
equest for finding of fact)
topography also emphasizes the
difference between bituminous and an
thracite coal, because where one is
present the Other is absent. No county
in Pennsylvania produces both anthra-
cite and bitum:nous coal. defend
ants eighth request for finding If
fact.)
Both bintuminous and anthracite
coal were originally deposits Of vege-
table matter, but anthracite coal has
been subject to a process. which has
not been applied to "ituminous where
by, through the application Of heat, a
large proportion Of the volatile matter
has been removed. Defendants ninth
request for finding Of fact)"
The decision further points out that
81 per cent of the anthracite produced
is Pennsylvania IS used for domestic
purposes and substantially all anthra-
cite is used for fuel COR the produc-
ton of heat for dOm"s site purposes,
while bituminors is used al ost ex-
cluSiyely for manufactur PURPOSES.