The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1893-01-14
GREAT RAILWAY suit.
Special Report of Attorney
General Stockton to Gov
ernor Albeit.
PEOPLES RIGHTS PROTECTED.
Central, Port Reading and Easton
& Amboy Attacked in the
Interest of Coal
Consumers.
PEOPLES RIGHTS PROTECTED.

the Governors message. The informa.
tion is given in concise shape and the re-
port. besides setting forth the facts.
makes apparent the great difficulty en-
countered in collecting tnem:-
TRENTON. N. j., Dec. 8. 1899.
Hon. Leon Albeit, Governor or the State
of New Jersey
GovERNoR-In compliance with the re-
quest you made yesterday that should
give you brief account OF the proceed
ings which had been instituted against
the com bination and their present con-
dition, submit the folloWing:-
Sometime in February last, I was re-
quested by you to obtain copies OF the
leases and agreements. which were then
reported TO have been made. having for
their object the combination of coal pro-
ducing and transportation companies.
with the view of creating monopoly,
and controlling the price of coal. found
no such papers on file, and endeavored to
procure copies of them. but failed TO do
SO, l made q direct application to the
Central Railroad Company, but received
in reply communication stating that
there was no objection on the part of the
company to display the instruinent to my
inspection. but that, for good and suf1-
cient business reasons, it WAS desmeG not
advisable to make them public at that
time.
PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY.
Subsequently on the 28th day of
April. / commenced an investigation
with the view of proceeding against the
combination which was alleged to have
been formed between the Philadelph1a
aud Rendiug, New Jersey Central. Port
Reading, Lehigh Valley and otner rail-
roads, and had partly prepared bill OF
discovery in order to get possession OF the
agreements when | was called upon by
one of the counsel of the Central Railroad
Company, who handed me the lease
and tri-partite agreement. on which
1 Immediately commenced proceedings.
On the 30th DAY of May, 1917.
l exhibited an information in the
Court of Cnancery against the Central
Railroad Company of New Jersey, the
Port Reading Railroad Company and the
Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Com
pauy, aud obtained an order on the
defendants to show cause why an inJunc-
ton should not issue, aud, in the mean
time, a preliminary order commanding
the defendants to desist from carrying
out the alleged combination. The ln-
formation was necessarily volumlnous,
containing a statement OF all the leglsla-
ton in reference to theIvarieus companies
concerned in ths combination. The
affidayits and exhibits attached estab-
nshed the charges beyond dispute.
They were confined almost exclu-
slvely to the ad dmission OF the
defendants, consisting of their reports
made at various times to the State and
State Board of Assessors; the reports
made by the presidents to their stock
holders, and voluntary admissions con-
tained in the testimony which had been
given before q committee or the New
York Senate The object of the infor-
nation WAS to have the lease between the
Central Railroad Company and the Fort
Reading Railroad Company, and certain
tri-partite agreement between the Gem
tral Railroad Company, the Fort Read-
ing railroad Company, and the Pnilu-
delphia and Reading Railroad Company
declared to be ultra UtreS, and thers
fore void, and void also upon the ground
of public policy, in that they tended TO
create monopoly in reference to neces-
sary of lite. The question was argued ut
great length before the Chancellor each
of the companies being represented by
eminent counsel from other States as
we'll as our own, and the State being rep
resented by Mr. Barker Gummers aud
Judge Frederick w. Stevens, as well as
the Attorney General.
THE CHANCELLoR'S OPINION.
The Chancellor fled his opinion on
August 25, 1892. He held that the lease
was not onIy unauthorized. but WAS eX-
pressly forbidden by law. That its effect
was to combine coal producers aud car
tion in the production and sale of
anthracite coal, sJabIe commodity OF
the Staie. That it was a corporate excess
of power which tended co monopoly and
the public injury. He granted an injunc-
tion, which WAS duly served on the de-
PENDANTS, directing hem to refrain from
performing and carrying into effect the
lease and the tri-partite agreement; di-
rectIng the Central Company TO take pos
session OF its own road, and not to permit
the Port Reading or the Philadel phia
and Reading to operate 1t and directing
the latter companies to desist and refrain
from continuing to control the roads,
property and franchises of the Central
railroad Company of New Jersey, and
from in any wise 1ntermedoling
herewith; commanding all the defend
ants to absolutely desist and refrain from
operating their railroads in the State OF
New Jersey in such manner as TO ainlnlsn
competition in the trade In coal, and
making. continuing or acting under any
ARRANGEMENT or combination having for
its object, effect or result the control and
oneraIion OF the Central Railroad Of New
Jersey by the other defendants. and
thereby effecting an artificial scarcity or
arbitrarily increasing the price OF coal, or
the prevention of legitimate competition.
On the 17th day of October filed sup
Elemental information recit ing the pro-
ceeuings which had already taken place
and charging that the injunction and
ordes s of the Chancellor had been will
fully and deliberately violated. | at
tached to this information affidavits
showing che price Of coal before and alter
the injunctions, accompanied by the
coal circulars, also the admis-
sions of the President OF the
Reading Railroad and, Philadelphia
and Reading Coal and Iron Com
pany. The Chancellor granted an order
on the defendants to show cause why
receiver should not be appointed as
prayed for Answering affidavits were
I, filed by the defendants, denying that they
had violated the injunction, and proof
| was also taken In the case under the di-
| rection of the Chancellor. THIS matter
came on to be argued on The first day Of
| December, and the Chancellor Is still
| holding it under advisement.
| EASToN AND AMBOY.
| An information was also filed on the
| 17tn day of October against the Easton
and Amboy Railroad Company, Lehigh
| Valley Terminal Railway Company. the
Philadelphia ana Reading Railroad
| Company, the Lehigh Valley Rail-
road Company, the Central Railroad
| Company of New Jersey and the Della
! ware and Bound Brook Railroad Com
j pany. This information also necessarily y
rcc;fod OF oraa6 fenOrh the leUislation