Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-03-12
ANT|-MERGER ACT
SUIT MAY FOLLOW
GAS FIRM INQUIRY
Bride investigates Signifl-
canoe of Transfer of Con-
troll to New Company.
LEGAL ACTION IN CASE
APPEARS INEVITABLE
Central Public Service Corporation
Heads Deny Owning Amy
Washington Stock.

Steps to invoke the LaFollette anti
merger act against the new owners Of
the Washington Gas Light Co. and its
subsidiaries, appeared imminent today
as a result of the recent series OF de-
velopments in the gas situation.
Public utility officials admitted that
in the light of the somewhat puzzlins
stock manipulations, and the change ir
management, coupled with the infor-
nation developed more than a year age
during an investigation of the SEA
board Investment Trust when it, &C
quired control of the gas properties
legal action appeared to be inevitable
Awaits Brides Inquiry.
At the Public Utilities Commission
however. it was said no definite action
would be taken until Corporation Coun-
sci William W. Bride, its general coun-
sci, completes an inquiry into the sig
nificance of the transferaof the control
of the gas properties to the Washington
and Suburban Cos. and the floating OF
a Sc, 500, 900 bond issued by that con-
the management of the operating COM
panies to the Central Public Service
Corporation of Chicago, gigantic pub
lie Utility outfit,
The utility officials have certain opi1-
ions as to who owns the gas companies
now and why, and think Mr.. Bride may
develop enough evidence in his investiga-
ton to warrant court action under the
La Toilette act. This law forbids a for
eign public utility corporation, or any
foreign or local holding corporation
directly or indirectly, to own, control or
hold or vote the stocks or bonds OF any
Act Previously Invoked.
The Public Utilities Commission in
voked the La Toilette act against the
Seaboard Investment Trust after it &C
CURED control of the gas properties BY
suing to compel it to dispose OF the
1903 SOC shares of capital stock OF the
gas company. The court, however, held
that the law had not been violated Ii
this case. because the Seaboard was q
common law trust and not a corpora
ton.
The Washington and Suburban Com
panieS which now control the gas stock
insist they are common-law trust
having tls SAINT IeSaI STATUS 40 e.ie
Seaboard Investment Trust. But the
chief concern of the utility officials Is
the relationship between the new hold
ing concern and the Central Public
Service Corporation, headed by Albert
L. Pierce, the Chicago public utilities
magnate.
Mr.. Pierce as well as w. H Wildes
executive vice president of the Central
Corporation, announced in press dis
patches from Chicago, that the concern
did not own directly or indirectly any
stock in the gas companies and theiI
concern would merely manage these
utilities.
Despite these announcements. Donald
Mcpherson, general counsel for the
Central Corporation, through Wilton j
Lambert, attorney for the Washington
Gas light Co, issued sweeping denial
that the Central Corporation has a
management contract" with tne Wash
ington and Suburban Companies.
The statement of MIR. Mcpherson al
first served to confuse the situation
but after some consideration, The utility
officials came to the conclusion that il
meant, in view of the announcements
of Mr.. Pierce and Mr.. Wldes, that the
Central Corporation proposed &c manage
the properties without a contract.
Link May Be Found.
Utility officials point out that while
there may be no relation between the
Central Public Service Corporation and
the Washington and Suburban Com
panies, Mr.. Brides inquiry may develop
a connection between the corporation
and some of its allied interests under
which the provisions of the La Toilette
act might be applied
The courts decision in the Seaboard
Investment Trust case was not appealed
by the commission, but if any basis is
found for legal action as result of the
recent developments, it was indicated at
the commission that the case would be
carried to the Supreme Court if neces-
Sary