The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1923-06-14
WEST VIRGINIA LOSES GAS
CASE IN SUPREME COURT
Cannot Restrict Expectation of
Natural Gas Into Maryland

jurisdiction to decide on their merits
the cases brought by the States of
Ohio and Pennsylvania to prevent
West Virginia placing restriction on
the expectation of natural gas and
that the suits were not brough pre-
maturely.
An investigation and important
question, directly effecting 100000
people in $50 cities and towns in
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentu-
cky and Maryland was submitted to
the Supreme Court for decision in
the commonly termed natural gas
cases. The proceedings were brought
separately by the state of Ohio and
Pennsylvania to prevent the state of
West Virginia from enforcing result
tatory legislation which would have
the effect Of reducing the supply of
natural gas which the people in the
five states have been obtaining from
the West Virginia fields.
The oral arguments in the two
cases brought out that the peak of
natural gas production was reached
in West Virginia in 1916, when 1913,
O0O,0O0,000 feet were produced, of
which ga per cent was sent outside
the state for consumption. In 1919
the production Appropriated 1885,
000,000,O00 of which about the same
percentage was exported.
West Virginia contended that it
had the right to regulate through a
state commission the quantity of
natural gas which must be available
for the use Of it's own citizens, and
determine the surplus for distribution
through pipe line companies in the
neighboring states Counsel for West
Virginia further asserted that during
the peak of demand for natural gas
for heating and industrial purposes
West Virginia state institutions, in
GLIDING schools, had to be closed, and
that there was much suffering in
homes in the state during the winter
months because the supply was not
adequate to meet the demands for
cooking and heating purposes. With
such conditions existing in West
Virginia, it was stated, large quaint
ties of natural gas were being sent
out Of the state into Ohio ard Penn
sylvania much of it for use in indus
tries in competition with those Of
West Virginia.
Ohio obtains from West Virginia
80 per cent of the natural gas it an
nually consumes, Pennsylvania 35 per
cent, Indiana 80 per cent, Kentucky
80 per cent and Maryland 100 per
cent, the court was advised
Ohio and Pennsylvania in the argu-
ments presented for those states by
their Attorneys General and counsel
emphasized the distress which would
prevail, should their citizens be de-
prived Of the supply Of natural gas
which they had been obtaining from
West Virginia, denying that it was
sought for industrial use after No
vember l each year. They challenged
the authority Of West Virginia to re-
strain what they termed interstate
commerce, which they insisted COM
menced in the oil fields as soon as the
natural gas entered the pipe lines,
which were by law designated COM
mon carriers, and presented condi-
lions in interstate commerce similar
to those which exist when coal is
loaded into railroad cars at the mines
for shipment outside the state.
Should West Virginia destroy the
amity which now prevails among the
states, and be permitted to place
what Ohio and Pennsylvania termed
an embargo" upon her natural gas,
those states might retaliate, the court
was advised bywithholding from West
Virginia supplies for which that state
is dependent upon them to furnish.
West Virginia estimated that its
available supply Of natural gas would
be exhausted in from ten to fifteen
years at the present rate of consump-
ton. Ohio and Pennsylvania replied
that as long as the supply continued
the corporations operating the pipe
lines were under contractural obliga-
tions to furnish the gas to their con-
sumers whether they resided in West
Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania or else
where, and that any restHction i'm
posed upon them which would pre-
vent them from filling their contracts,
would constitute a restraint of inter
state trade. Further it was conten-
ded that the natural gas production
in West Virginia becomes the prop
erty of the person or corporation into
whose lawful possession it passes,
and can be disposed of by the owner
as any other property, even though
its sale included transportation out
side the state.