The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-02-16
Prick CARNEGIE SUI
1T MAY LEAD TO OTHER LEGAL CON
TESTS INVOLVING MILLIONS.
Validity of the Coke Contract with
the Great Steel Corporation May
BE Questioned in Court.

PITTSBURG, Feb. 13.-There is no proof,
as yet, that service has been made on any
of the defendants in the Frick-Carnegie
suit. When seen to-day Mr.. Scott, counsel
for the Carnegie Steel Company. refused TO
ants are not required to answer earlier
than fifteen days after the bill has been
served on them, it will be seen that some
time will elapse before the plan OF the de-
Tense becomes public. Mr.. Tricks attor-
neys nave arranged for serving the bill on
all of the defendants. This work will take
some time. Ordinarily. such bills are
served upon the defendants attorneys.
who accept service for their clients. In
this case no person will say who will serve
or has accepted clients. Attorney McCook,
however, has said that 1t was being done
in the ordinary way and considerable time
would be consumed, as the defendants
were scattered to all parts of the com
pass. This is taken as an indication that
each of the defendants is to be served
separately, and means that an officer of the
law will hunt Mr.. Carnegie at D~ungeness.
+ IA, the winter home of Mrs. Lucy Car
negie.
II Is Sdfu NY SOln idWyCic thdt "a III
Frick had stated in his bill that the Car
negie Company was a limited partnership,
it would not have been necessary for sepa-
rate service to be made on each of the de-
PENDANTS. Mr.. Frick however, made the
charge that the corporation is a general
partnership, and, therefore, each separate
partner must be served. 1t was stated to-
day that president Schwab had not gone TO
- md tho he uvaIIlh nfIrT fn fhn
city on Saturday.
Although Mr.. Tricks suit to break the
binding force o. the 'ironclad" agreement
and recover from the Carnegie Steel Com
pany, limited, the market value of his
holdings in that concern, Is the main line
of attack opened by the anti-Carnegie adj
herents, the minority stockholders, who are
lined up against the policy of Mr.. Carnegie,
1t is said, are certain to follow 1t up with
the suit attacking the validity OF the coke
contract of the Carnegie Company with the
h. c.. Prick Coke Company. Attorney Will
liam B. Rogers. although refusing to deny
or affirm his connection with the big case,
is commonly credited with having in
charge the proposition of the coke contract
end of the matter. 1t is expected this suit
will be filed in Greensburg, as Mr.. Tricks
attorneys at that point have been in fire.
quent consultation with attorneys repre-
senting Mr.. Frick in this city. The suit,
however, will not likely be precipitated for
some days yet, and perhaps several weeks
AlAQl SldPoS bOAOkO - - Ne1 ANA AaAHo Aa
the courts.
The sum of money involved in the pro-
posed suit Is said to- run up to a gigantic
figure. The estimated total Of the Carnegie
Steel Company's daily consumption Of
coke is nine hundred cars. The Prick Com
pany produces about $500 cars of o
per day; so that three-fftbs of the whole
goes to the steel concern at the low price
OF $1.35 per ton. In other words. the Car
negie steel Company, 1t Is alleged, saves
from SIS, 600 to $4,000 a day. With the cost
OF production and free coke rates other
items of expense in the manufacture OF
coke constantly going up, the minority
stockholders of the coke company say that
if the contract is allowed to run their
profits will be eventually cut to almost
nothing. The suit then, will ask the court
to annul the agreement altogether and re-
lieve them from a situation that has been
forced upon them by the majority hold
ings.
The recorders office of Allegheny county
furnishes an interesting piece of news rela-
tive to the present quarrel, and the revoca-
ton of the powers of attorney filed by
Andrew Carnegie relating to II. c.. Prick,
H. M. Curry, +. 7. Lovejoy, l.. c. Phillips
and Henry Phipps. jr., in which he de-
prived each of them of any rights to sign
or act for him, which they have held for
years, adds another page to the contro-
versy and furnishes a reason why Mr..
Tricks attorneys state that these gentle
men, or some OF them, favor Mr.. Prick in
the present proceedings. From the records
X appears that Mr.. Carnegie took away ali
their rights as his attorney In fact as far
back as Dec. 20, 1899. or about the time he
was comforting with Mr.. Schwab in New
York. The action was taken in that State
and forwarded at once to the recorders
office here, where 1t was filed and recorded
Dec. q, or four days before Mr.. Carnegie
came to Pittsburg and demanded from Mr..
Frick his resignation as chairman of the
board of managers Of the Carnegie Steel
Company.