The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-02-16
CUTTHRO&T COKE CONTRACT
To be Fought in Court by Alleged
Victims of the "Ironclad.''

Pittsburg, Pa, Feb. 15.-Although the
suit which H. C. Frick filed Tuesday to
break the binding force of the "ironclad'
agreement and recover from the Carnegie
Steel company the market value of his
holdings in that concern, is the main line
of attack opened by the anti-Carnegie ad-
herents, the minority stockholders who
are lined up against the policy of Mr..
Carnegie, it is said, are certain to follow
it up with the suit attacking the validity
of the coke contract of the Carnegie COM
pany with the H. c. Frick Coke company.
Attorney w. r. Rogers, although refus-
ing to deny or affirm his connection with
the big case is commonly credited with
having in charge the preparation of the
coke contract end of the matter. 1t is ex-
pected that this suit will be filed in
Greensourg, as Mr.. Tricks attorneys at
that 4pont have been infrequent consuta-
ton with attorneys representing Mr..
Frick in this city. The suit, however, viii
not likely be precipitated for some days
yet and perhaps several weeks may elapse
before it is ready for filing in the courts.
The sum of money involved in the pro-
posed suit IS said to run up to gigantic
figure. The estimated total OF the Car
negie Steel company's daily c0nsump ion
is 800 cars. The Prick company produces
about 800 cars Of coke per day, so that
three-fifths Of the whole goes to the steel
concern at the low price Of S1.35 per ton.
In other words, the Carnegie Steel COM
pany, it Is alleged, saves from $1,000 to
$4,000 day. With the cost Of production
and freight rates and other items of ex-
pense in the manufacture of coke con-
stantIy going up, the minority stockhold-
ers Of the coke company say that if the
contract is allowed to run their profits
vii be eventually cut to almost nothing.
The suit, then. win ask the court 10 an
null the agreement altogether and relieve
them from a situation that has been fore
ed upon them by the majority holdings,
Pittsburg. Pa, Feb l5.-There IS no
proof as yet that service has been made
on any of the defendants in the Frick-
Carnegie suit When seen today Mr..
Scott. counsel for the Carnegie Steel
company. refused 20 give out any infor-
nation. As the defendants are not re-
ouired 10 answer earlier than fifteen days
after the bill has been served upon them
il viii be seen that some tine viii elapse
before the plan Of the defense becomes
public Mr. Tricks attorneys have ar
ranged for serving the bill upon all Of the
defendants. This work viii take some
time. Ordinarily such bills are served
upon the defendants attorneys. who ac-
cept service for their clients IN this
case no person VIII say who has been
served 81 has accepted service. Attorney
ATcCook said, however. that IL was being
done in the ordinary way and that con
siderable time would be consumed. - the
defendants are scattered to all parts ot
the compass. This is taken as an indica-
tior. that each % the defendants Il % be
served separately. and means that an o.
Heer OF the Law VIII hunt Mr.. Carnegie
AZ Dunyeaness. Fla. the winter hone OF
afrs. Lucy Carnegie. L Is said By Scne
lawyers that Il Mr.. Frick had stated in
his bill that the Carnegie company vas a
limited partnership Il would rot have
been necessary fo- separate service 20 be
made upon each a. rhe defendants NJ
Friek. however. made the charge .4ag re