The Savannah morning news., 1904-03-17
OTHER RAILROAD COMBINATIONS.

When the case of the Northern Secu-
rites Company was on trial in the
lower court, it was said by the attor-
neys of that company, in their argu-
ment, that the makeup of substantial
ly all of the great American systems
| of railroads was on trial. By that 1t
was meant that if the decision was
against the Northern Securities Com
pany pretty nearly all of the other rail-
road systems would have to be brok-
en- up, for the reason that they were
in violation of the antitrust law. II
is probable that there was some APP
prehension that such was the fact,
and that millions of dollars worth Of
securities were in danger of great de-
probation, if not of being rendered
practically worthless.
The impression now seems to be that
other railroad systems are in no dan
ger of being attacked by the govern
ment. Indeed, it is by no means GER
tain that the decision in the Northern
Securities case touches any other rail-
road system. There are good reasons
for thinking that it isn't the policy of
the government to find out whether or
not there are other railroad systems
which are violating the antitrust act.
In an interview directly after the de-
cision in the Northern Securities case
was rendered Attorney General Knox
said: las to the bearing of the deci-
sion upon other railroads / have only
to say: The government has never
claimed that the law is any broader
than its language plainly indicates. II
between other railroads there exist
contracts. combinations and conspir-
acies by which interstate commerce is
restrained, then they violate the law.
The government is claiming no
more in respect to this case than it
did before the bar of the court. l
say this much not because it is neces-
sary to give the country assurances
that the government doesn't mean to
run amuck, but because of the histor-
zeal character of that part of the de-
PENDANTS case and some utterances
that followed the decision of the case
below"
From this it is fair to infer that it
is not the purpose of the government
to seek out other roads for prosecu-
ton, though it is probable that if al
legged violations of the antitrust law
were called to it's attention it would feel
bound to investigate them. 1t has
been asserted that there are combina-
tions or contracts between other rail-
road systems which are in violation of
the antitrust law. For instance. there
is some sort of an arrangement be-
tween the Pennsylvania and the Bal
timore and Ohio railroads which has
been the subject of comment. 1t is
claimed by the officials of those roads,
however that the arrangement isn't in
restraint of trade. 1t is only for the
purpose of preventing rate cutting.
Competition is just as great as it ever
was. 1t seems that the Pennsylvania
Railroad owns some Of the stock of
the Baltimore and Ohio, but not a con-
trolling interest in it. 1t is probable
that there are several railroad sys-
tens that have an understanding of
that kind. 1t is doubtful. however, if
such an understanding could be con-
strued as a violation of the antitrust
act as it does not tend to restrain in
terstate trade.
1t is noticeable that since the inau-
guration of the suit against the North
ern Securities Company the merging
of corporations into great combinations
has practically ceased. Since that time
only two great trusts have been form
ed, namely, the Shipbuilding Trust and
the North Atlantic International Mer-
chantiIe Marine Trust. Neither was
successful, mainly. perhaps, for the
reason that the public wouldn't buy
the securities of either. The investing
public took the hint from the suit
against the Northern Securities Com
pany, and declined to invest in any
more great mergers. 1t may not be
too much to say that the suit against
the Northern Securities Company
marked the beginning of the end of
overcapitalized trusts and inaugurated
more sober business methods in COM
mercial affairs.