New-York tribune., 1907-01-27
THE COAL ROADS SUED.
IN INJUNCTION SOUGHT.
Independents Charge Breach OF
Contract and Discrimination.

erpre.ne Court Justice Levent-itt has reserved
,scision ca the application Of John A. Garve-
counsel for Henri r. Meeker and another 90 en-
,oin the Erie Railroad Company, the New York
sysouehsnna & Western Railroad Company and
.be wilkes Barre & Eastern Railroad Company
s-onn refusing to perform a contract for the
transportation OF the plaintiffs coal and TO en-
ioin tie E-se company from interfering with
srcF performance.
The plaintiffs are dealers IN anthracite coal in
this city procuring supplies from colleriss In
PENNSYLVANIA. at near WiIkes-Barre. The
Wilkes Barre company owns a short line OF road
from Wilkes Barre 70 Stroudsburg. Penn. where
n connects with the main limo OF the Susque-
hanna company, running from there 20 the New
York tidewater The susauehanna cornpa NJ. IL
Is alleged, owns all the stock Of the Wilkes
Barre company. and it is also alleged that about
% per cent OF the SusQuehanna company is IN
turn owned by the Erie The susquehanns COM
psny operates the wilkes-Ba company. and
II Is stated that the officers of the Susquehanne
and the Erie companies ere practically identical.
According 10 the lawyer the plaintiffs entered
into contract with the Wilkes Barre company
in 1894 by which the company agreed TO ship
all Of their coal from certain coleries over the
Tilkes-BaTre Railroad to tidewater and to pay
for the services certain percentage OF the tide
water prices OF the coal That was to continue
Until May. 1909 and thereafter. unless termi-
mated on six months notice
Relying on this contract. the plaintiffs con-
trscted with the owners OF various collieries TO
purchase their coal st price which enabled
them 10 make reasonable profit on the trans
action. so long their contract with the Wilkes
Barre company continued.
Al the time the contract with +ba vv,Il-er
Barre company was made no general tariff rates
existed. although the Interstate Commerce act
requiring rates to he made. had gone into effect
sn 1857
l-ater. according to counsel. tariff rates were
published. but the defendants never pretended
fhst the published rates interfered with the ner
Torrance OF this contract. The performance
was assumed by the Susquehsnna compauv
and was duly made until August 1906 when
fhe susauehanna declined any longer TO exc
cure It, hasing its refusal the fact that it had
published its rates. which differed from those
specified in the contract
II has since then refused 10 deliver any, coal
shipped by the plaintiffs over its road excent On
the payment Of the published rates The moving
papers show that the rates thus published aro
excessive and higher than rates charged bv the
pennsylvania Railroad Company for similar SER
VICE. ana fhat there are no independent shippers
except the plaintiffs.
The papers also state that two Other coal
AZ T.
ern Coal Company and the HildaIe Coal ana
iron Company. ship coal over these roads. but
me papers declare that they are both owned nv
controlled by the defendants
IN showing the alleged interference Of the Fria
company with the contract and also the allsgas
nao Faith involved in the breach Of the contract
II is alleged in the moving papers that in 1aoT
me Erie and Susquehanna companies. with five
other anthracite railroad companies, the Della
ware q Hudson, the Lackawanna, the Jersey
Central. the Reading and the Ontario & West
en- which at the time owned or controlled a
large portion OF the coal in the anthracite region
entered into scheme 10 gain further control OF
me coal and 20 bring about monopolv In 4,
80 as 10 increase the price Of coal and AT the
same time increase the rate Of transportation
10 such an extent to bar out the independen,
dealers.
me LAWYERS say that a pretext to ensbl,
then 10 carry through the scheme tbese rail-
road companies bought out the Temple Iron
company and elected their officers as officers
s1o directors OF the company. The Temple
iron Company a mining company which
acquired some coal lands and the officers OF tba
F-Hoao companies. who constituted it's hoard
of directors. held directors meetings osfensibI-
~ relation 70 the business OF the iron COM
PaTy, but really prete1t 20 enable tho ot1
GERS or the railroad companies 20 get together
snd agree on rates 90 outside shtpners Tn -
NAV tirne the rates Of the different railroad COM
made uniform. SS
Mr.. Carver told the justice that prior IN that
time the rate charged for the Transportation ~
coa@ nae never exceeded the difference between
ne ffoewater price and the price at the breaker
out s Al mat tliIe rate was made TO independent
shippers which did exceed that rate co tbst
efter paying the percentage Of the tidewater
price Tor the coal az the breakers, business could
not De conducted by the independent dealer,
except at loss.
Frederick 3. Jennings appeared for the de-
1en6ants.