The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-12-09
COURT YOIDS TEMPLE iron CO.
non rs THtT 1T VIOLATES THE
SHERNiN tNTI-TRt ~ Law.
Judges Grs, and Bunin<ten In 4. -. Cir-
cut court >fnrm Decision In suit
Tlrpushi IN June, 1909 Judge Lam
ninS Rrnsiers Dissenting Opinion.

-enths Of all the unmined ar. hracite coal
IN P.nns'N ania. WAS declared to-day by
aha IpI,ed States irrult Court 10 exist
IN collation. II the sherman ANTITRUST net.
The decision was given by Judges Gray
and BursnRton. The third member.
Judge i.snning. gave "A dissenting vote
90 the effect that IN" eviG-nc. oil rot
prove that the TenTl" Iron Company -
an lie yal comhlra ion
BY tina o., n The lnijei Sta,"- VIM
n impCrian, tut only a raTtial victory.
When " hogan the action. in June. lvb7.
IL was with i set purpc ~" In oIsrui n"
combination for control u the anthracite
trade
TIE proceeding str, uEly approved by
President Roosevelt made defendants
az nearly all companies engaged IN the
mining transportation and Wholesale
selling Of anthracite except the Ontario
and Western and til. S,!>,ruchannI Coal
company All the other hir companies.
as the Reading New Jersey Central,
Iahish Valley. Erie and l.ackawanna.
were attacked
Tn. essenc" # th" Government petit
ton was That the defendants named
here have formed and entered into a
combination or conspiracy Ia restrain
trade and commerce In anthracite coal
among the several States by shuttin
out competition in the transportation
and sale Of that commodity and r-gI.
latlng the price thereof among
the several States. AMI have
monopoliz.d and attempted 10 monop.
Ollie and combined and conspired with
each other TO monopolize "A part Of such
trade and commerce III violation Of 'hs
act. and that the said defendants. their
agents and servants and all persons
acting or assuming 10 act under their
authority be forever rnJoIned from cCn-
tinuing or In any manner acting Under
or in pursuance Of the aforesaid nj
bination or oonspiracv IN restraint OF
trade and commerce among the several
tates and from continuing to monop-
olize or attempting TO monop"li1e any
part Of such trade and commerce IN the
manner aforementioned
The United States charged various acts
in defiance and IN violation of the law
Only a. to one OF these acts does the
decision sustain the contention OF the
Cove rnmrnt and that - "a 10 he emf J..
Iron Company. The or.Rin, purpose and
status Of III now outi iwet "orpCr ~ on.
briefly il a. follows.
IL operates undo. one II the few special
charters which wore granted by the Com
monweaith OF Pennsylvania prior TO the
adoption OF the state CONSTITUTION Cnti
1909 the Temple Iron Company was little
bur a charter Sine" thon IL has tccl an
active operating coal company
Under an agin mont uNrgt.tcd Fob
r1ary "a. 1889 thu Temple Iron Company
bought a. OF Januar,' /. that year. from
Simpson \ wat<ins ton anthracite" coal
companies near Scranton. ing in
payment therefor $4,000 out oi s.. Co.,
90 stock and S.. SOD OOD tyr cent mott
gage and collateral trust BOMBS uur II an
authorized issue Of tl5 BN. 40
Other agreements. executed tn" - T.,
day end effective from tn" 40 Cc'e.
transferred through the Gug mtg l. AZ
Company of New York ownership oi
the s. 10000 Temple Iron Company
stock and OF such additional pa:; OF the
81. 90 .0OO totRl ~. CO suthoi zed . rlIgh'
be issued. To six comrr MES. they sl-r
guaranteeing the Temple Iron Comp ny
bonds in like percentage a. they r"-elI d
the stock. "a follows
Reading Company 20 90 per cent.
Lehigh Valley Railroad Company. - -
per cent. Central Railroad Company Of
New Jersey. II - per cent: Delaware.
Lackawanna and Western Railroad Com
pany. 10 81 per cent. Erie Railroad Com
pany. 5sI per cent and New York Sus-
quehanna and Western Railroad Company
4 81 per cent.
Finding that this corporation is illegal
the Court by its ma jority decision de-
clares to-day that tse Erie Railroad had
a right TO purchase the New YORK, Su--
quehanna and Western Railroad. that tn.
Reading Company also had rIGnt To &C
qulre a ma Joritv holding Of the New Jersey
Contra Railro q stock. that the sev"ral AZ
fhracita com pa MES did moth ing unlawful
In sitting the prof eCted indeTendent rail-
road 60 tide water. which certain indepsn-
dent coal operators planned IN Isss and
that the so-cailsd as per cent contracts.
under Which the big railroads buy and
market The product Of Independenr mines.
are not open 10 attack
81 such Ii the present outcome OF the fam
Gus coal trust suit. which was directed
against fourteen anthracite railroads and
forty-ive other companies and operators
controlling more than ~ per cent. Of the
Anthracite lands 81 Pennsylv ania and
three-quarters of the output Of hard coal
The case MAS argued IN the United
Mates Circuit Court last February by
James c. McReyn"lds for the United
States while a dozen nr more prominent
lawyers appeared for the various defend
Ants.
The Temple Iron Company ~ owned
by the Ave railroad systems above named
by holding stock Of Subordinate COM
panies Tho Government alleged that hy
Illegal contracts the defendant com
paniets had dest rovod competition III the
mining and transportation of coal, and
the suit was brought to sever tho rela-
ton between the railroad companies
and the coal mining companies. and brea:;
up the trust
The finding Of the court IN the volumi-
nous opinions 81 Judges Gray and Biting
ton as summarized III IN" per curtain
opinion are ~ follows
The result ~ the foregoing opinion
Il tina, the court unanimously agree that
the petition should be dismissed
Il A. ~ the On ,rge- concerning the
acquisition by the Erie company " tho
capital stock ~ tn. New York SIsqus-
hanna and Western Railroad Company.
. A. TO the charge concerning the
acquisition by III. Reading Company Of
the ma Jority 81 the capt. Il stock ~ the
Central Railroad Of New Jersey. and
- A. To the general 'hnrge ~ n com
bination or conspiracy in violation 81 tbs.
ANTITRUST act in tn. dev elOpm"nt II
which IL 10 char gei the Other combinations
eet forth in the petition ver" used as steps.
set forth IN paragraph Cf the position
"a majority Of the court bold that rho
patition should hes diaTni-S" ~ IN the
charge concerning the so-cc lie rs -"
cent. contracts.
"A ma jority Of IN" Ourt als) held that
the charge OF an lille gal combination IN
Poguas.t Of the ulaftP-, relating to the