The Washington herald., 1909-04-01

The paper trust was vigorously assailed
yesterday during the tariff discussion in
the House by Representative ROthermel.
OF Pennsylvania. He declared that last
June, when q H. P. Gould. a representa-
tive of the Gould Paper Company. ap-
peared before the select committee and
testified that there was no paper trust.
his concern was then operating in re-
straint of trade and was later fined for
being trust at the time the testimony
was given.
AR ROthermel introduced documentary
evidence ard a telegram from Henry A
Wise. assistant United States attorney
az New York, to prove his contention.
Attacks walters Evidence
Tom T. Waller. Of the International Pa
per Company. also appeared before the
committee on May IS Mr.. Rothermel said.
and declared the company with which he
was associated had no connection with
the paper trust. He then introduced evil
dence 10 show that this statement was
untrue
My attention" said Mr. RothermeI.
was called 10 the fact that number OF
officials of various companies in the coun-
try had appeared before the Mann com
mittee and testified there was no agree
ment or combination IN restraint of trade
regulating the price and limiting the out
nut Of fiber and Manila paper. These
statements startled me. because I was
quite confident there was an unlawful
combination Of some kind. subsequent
~ noticed in the papers that some of the
companies had pleaded guilty or were
convicted in the Federal courts Of New
York CITY.
Both Pleaded Guilty.
To confirm information ] had on the
subject I wired TO Henry A. Wise and
asked him whether the Gould Paper Com
pany and the Continental Paper Bag
Company had been convicted or pleaded
guilty 10 the charge on July 70 His reply
was as follows;
Gould Paper Company ana Conti-
mental Paper Bag Company both pleaded
guilty June 19 to eight indictments charg-
ing them with unlawful combination in
restraint OF trade BY regulating the
price and limiting the output or fiber
and manila paper during period begin
ming September 1906. and each sentenced
20 fine of S2.99o. and fine was paid.
They were indicted together with twenty
three other manufacturer. the total rine
being S500G1'
Notwithstanding that the United
States courts had dissolved tie General
Paper Company in May. 1896 and re-
strained twenty-thTee other companies in
June of the same year from carrying
out their unlawful combinations and
agreements, the Gould Paper Company
and the international Paper Company
and twe2ty-three others entered into an
agreement in September. 1906" continued
Alr. RothermeL Tt IS strange that twen-
ty-five Of these companies should enter
into an agreement so soon after the
decision of the court and take chances
Of being fined under the criminal stat
utes OF the government
$2,OOe.OOO in Excess Profits.
AS I said before each paid a nne Of
5000 making $4,000 in the aggregate
But let us see what transpired while
this agreement was in force II I am cor
Tectly informed. twenty-five paper com
panies added SIG per ton TO the price Of
fiber and manila on an annual output of
100000 tons, which resulted in imposing
an additional S2,000o00 annually on the
consumers by the combination
Under the above statement II would
seem that a fine Of $4,000 Is inadequate
and Intellectual As long as millions can
be made by breaking the laws and the
penalty is reckoned On thousands. II VIII
result not only I'm placing a premium
on wrongdoing. but will be considered a
good Investment on the part of the law
breaker
As to the matter Of falsifying before
the committee, I wish 10 say IN conclu-
sion.
May Is and MAY IS 1903. the officials
testified there was no agreement or com
bination 20 control prices, &c June 10
the twenty-five companies pleaded guilty
Did the officials know they were misrep-
resenting the facts when they testified
there was no combination
Companies Knew of Action.
In connection with the other facts.
the following kilograms between Mr.. Wise
and myself viii be of interest:
Henry =. Wise Assistant L. s Attorney. New
No-k City. r. y.
Do you know whether the Gould Coraparv had
been apprsed Of the facts prior % NAY IS l90s
that there would be an indictment laid before the
grand ju=y. JOHN II. ROTHERMEL.
The following reply was received:
Hon. John Fl. Rothermel House Of Representative.
Washington. ID. G.
Do not know that Gould Company had been ap
prised Of facts prior 10 May g. 1905 that Indictment
would he laid before the grand juT They un-
doubtedly knew that the matter was receiving seri-
ous consideration by the grand jury prior 10 that
date. HENRY A WISE.
Assistant United States Attorney
THAT some OF these witnesses seem to
have had full knowledge Of the unlawful
combination when they testified there
was no such combination. calls for fur
ther investigation said Mr. Rothermel.
in conclusion.