The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-08-21
Attorney General Knows Nothing
United States Corporation.
NEVER SAW THE AGREEMENTS
PAPERS ARE NOT CONVENIENTLY
AT HAND AS INTIMATED.
Moreover, 1t Is Not the Duty of the
ton to Prospective LitfGants.

WASHINGTON, Aug. 20.-Attorney Cen
eral Knox to-day sent the following letter
to the Joint committee of the American
Antitrust League and District Assembly
60, Knights of Labor, in reply to one from
the committee requesting information from
Mr. Knox regarding the United States Steel
Corporation:
"Mr. III. b. Martin, Chairman Joint Com
mittee of American Antitrust League:
'Sir-I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt of your letter OF Aug. ~, 1871,
in which you request me to obtain for you
certain information with reference to GER
tain alleged agreement or agreements De
tween the constituent companies and indl-
viduals who organized the United States
Steel Corporation You ask me to AFFORD
you all the information that L can obtain
and you specifically refer TO an alleged
trust syndicate agreement which you
state the president of the United States
Steel Corporation. Mr.. c. NJ. Schwab, re-
6ustrial commission when on the witness
stand before that body, and you further
to be understood as covering any other
contracts of similar kind with which you
are acquainted or which you can obtain
for us You also state that your request
for information is founded on information
and belief that at the time this contract,
or these contracts; was or Nv were made; ntea
with the Carnegie Company, and you as
sumo, therefore. that the information must
hand l am, therefore. requested to give
thereof.
request is founded upon an erroneous as
sumption. 1 do not know who the individu-
ais are who organized the United States
Steel Corporation. II they are the persons
personally mentioned in the newspapers as
the promoters of the organization, with
the single exception of Mr. c. M Schwab.
| do not know, never saw and never was
in. any way connected with any of them.
never heard of any agreement between
them and the constituent members of the
Steel Corporation. Neither at the time of
the formation of the United States Steel
Corporation, nor at any time was l offi,
ciatly connected with the Carnegie Steel
Company | was formerly one of it's legal
advisers in the conduct of its manufacture
ing business, but was never consulted with
reference to the formation OF the United
States Steel Company. in relation to
the sale TO that company of the shares Of
stock held by the stockholders of the Car
negie Company.
Il have never seen the papers agree
ments TO which you refer, nor have l
been informed of their contents. l have
no knowledge whatever of their existence,
the term or scope. i am thus specific, as
/ desire to cover both the spirit and the
letter of your inquiry.
II may say. moreover, that | have no
access to the agreement or papers to which
you refer. l know nothing of the one to
which you especially refer. and do not even
know that such agreement is in ex-
istence. The information which you re-
quest is not in my possession. con-
veniently at hand, you assume and it
is, therefore, impossible for me to comply
with any OF the requests set forth in your
letter All this information you could at
any time have acquired through the usual
method of direct personal inquiry, there
by avoiding the doubtful propriety of ad-
dressing me through the medium of an
open letter which you concurrently de-
livered to this office. Whether if such
papers were accessible to me it would be
my duty to obtain them and furnish them
for use in legal proceedings TO which you
are a party, and the nature of which
you do not explain. is a question which
l do not care at this time to discuss
'If L may regard the letter as addressed
to me officially i will say: If this de-
partment is under obligations to furnish
information to prospective litigants in un-
disclosed proceedings. its responsibilities
and labors are necessarily greater than
they have ever been imagined from the
time of its formation. Indeed. as there
are generally two parties TO every con-
troversy, 1t would be difficult to discharge
such alleged duty to both parties in view
of conflicting interests. This department
was not called into being to furnish in
formation to private litigants. Its duty
and its object is to enforce the federal
statutes as interpreted by the courts wher-
ever there is probable cause for believing
that they have been violated
"P. G. KNOX, Attorney General