The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-02-26
Senate Is Unlikely to Take Action Upon the Purchase
 of Properties
ROOSEVELT'S ACTION WAS
 NEGATIVE IN MATTER
In the Opinion of the Senate Commit tee 1t Would Be Unfair and Un- just to Take Any Adverse
 Action Upon Merger.

Washington, February 25.-Two reports will be before the Senate committee on judiciary on Monday when it meets to vote on the investigation of the absorp- tion of the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad company by the United States Steel corporation. Since the publication E of the majority report of the sub-eom- mittee finding that the merger was violation of the sherman law and ad- E ministering severe rebuke to the Presi- dent, the minority, Messrs. Clark of Wy oming and Dillingham; have put their dis sent In the form of a report. All day there has been a variety of wire pulling and manipulation on the floor of the Sen 1ate preparatory to the vote in the com E mittee. The view of the minority is that A the Senate does not impose upon any com- 4 mittee any duty to investigate or consider whether the absorption was or was not legal transaction. Therefore, upon that point no opinion will be expressed except that in the judgment of the committee the determination of that question more properly belongs to court of compe- tent jurisdiction in an appropriate pro- ceedng with all of the parties before it."
 It will be asserted that the authority of the judiciary committee is limited by the resolution to an opinion as to the Presi- dents authority ito permit the absorp tion,' as is shown by his message. It will be pointed out that the primary in quiry relates to what the Presidents mes sage discloses that he did and under what circumstances.
 Three Things Disclosed.
 The minority finds that there are just three things disclosed by the Presidents message that are important and rele- want. They are that the President told the representatives of the Steel corpora tion he could not advise them to take the action proposed, that he felt it no public duty of his to interpose any objection under the facts and circumstances de- tailed to him, and that the President as- sumes all responsibility for his action in thus doing.
 The minority asserts that it is imma- terial to determine whether the under standing which the President has as to the details and conditions of the absorp- tion as disclosed to him by Messrs. Gary and Prick, was fully in accord with the facts That the President acted under the facts as he then understood them to be is the opinion of the majority, and 1t is declared that his action must be considered as having been taken under the facts and information he then had, as stated in the resolution directing the in- quiry to be made.
 It is declared that any other construc tion of this resolution would be tanta- mount to asking the committee to judge the Presidents act, not in the light of the circumstances and facts surrounding him at the time of his action but of those subsequently developed. In their opinion this would manifestly be unfair and unjust
 Whatever may have developed since that time as to the details either of the absorption itself or the cause or results thereof which were then unknown to the President should not in the opin- ion of the minority, form proper mat ter for consideration.
 They declare that it cannot be known what the President might have regarded as his duty if facts of other or differ ent nature had been presented to him.
 Strong Point Made.
 A strong point is made of the fact that the law clearly charges the United States district attorneys, under the direc- tion of the Attorney General, with the execution of the antitrust jaw. The mi nority of the committee finds that the President has no legal right to inter- fere with the proposed merger. It Is pointed out that he immediately notified the Attorney General of the converse ton he had with Messrs. Gary and Prick, but before receiving the letter from the President, the Attorney General advised him that under all of the information possessed by the department, the Unit ed States Steel corporation had not been under the ban of the law and that in his opinion the absorption of the Ten nessee concern would not change the legal situation. That the duty of en- forcing the law, under which the legal ity of the merger might be challenged, devolved up on the Attorney General and not upon the President is pointed out by the minority. It is decalred that the fact that the President immediately ad- vised with the Attorney General In the by the minority. It is declared that the acting entirely within the duties of his office.
 It Is found that while the Senate reso- lution directs the committee to report whether the President was authorized to permit the absorption that the circum- stances as developed show that the Pres ident neither permitted nor forbade it.