The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-11-17
CUT IN WAGES.
Members of the Window Glass
Trust Serve Notice
OF 80 Per Cent Reduction on
Their Employees.
FOLLOWS CONVICTION
And Imposition Of Fines by the
Federal Court.
Said to Have Made 400 Per Cent
in Year.
FOLLOWS CONVICTION

Washington, Nov. 1.-THE depart
ment of justice has taken notice of a
newspaper dispatch from Pfttsburg
that the corporations combined in the
socalled window glass trust have
served notice upon employees that
wage reduction of 80 per cent was the
only condition under which the fac
tories could continue to manufacture.
The dispatch further said the cor
porat1on attributed this u1timatum d1-
rectly to the successful prosecution by
the department of justice and the i'm
position by the United States court of
fines upon the company and its officers
and directors individually.
The department has issued a state
ment outlining it's view of the matter,
and incidentally intimating that the
reported action of the corporation, if
substantiated by the fact, would indi-
part of the court, which it is hoped,
would not be followed on any similar
OCCASION This intimation is inter
preted here as indicating an intention
to insist in similar cases upon Jail SEN
tences rather than fines.
Attorney General Wickersham ex-
pressed indignation at such statements
and strong doubt of its reliability.
The statement of the department
says:
THE evidence obtained by the de-
partment shows the Imperial Window
Glass company was organized in April,
1909. It manufactured no glass, but
: was purely a selling agency buying the
entire output of fifty or more manu-
facturers of window glass in some ten
different states.
''The agreement between it and the
manufa cturers from which it bought
provided that no glass should be sold
by the latter except to tn Imperial
Window Glass company. The stock of
the Imperial company was divided
among the manufacturers.
''It was not until the company had
brought into combination with it, un-
der such contracts, manufacturers of
about 81 per cent of the entire hand
blown window glass manufactured in
the United States that it was deter
mined to commence business. 1t be-
gan business in January. 1910.
by October 1, 1910, prices had been
advanced 70 per cent over what they
were in April, 1909 The evidence
showed that in the first three months
of its operation the Imperial company
earned net profits equal to its entire
capital stock.
''The largest advance in prices was
subsequent to this initial period, and
/ the evidence showed that in the ten
months of. its business the com bination
cleared about one million dollars, or
400 per cent on its capital stock.
! 'It leased Is factories at high rem
tails for the sole purpose of keeping
them closed and removing their prod
uct from the market It's expenses dur
this period were $13S,000 for one year
for leases and watchmeD of these
closed down factories.
indictments were found against the
S directors and officers of the com
pany. each one of whom was either
president or officer of one of the COM
panies who had entered into agree
ments to sell their product only to the
Imperial company. Demurrers to the
indictments We're overruled and the
case was set for trial in Pittsburg on
Monday, November IA.
"A few days previous overtures were
made to the attorney general on be-
half of the defendants suggesting that
they would plead nolle contendre, the
substantial equivalent of a plea of gull
ty, provided the attorney general would
agree to recommend to the court that
only fines be inflicted.
This was refused as the attorney
general considered, and so stated to the
defendants counsel, that the combi-
nation was one of the most fragrant
and intentional violations of the anti
trust law which had been brought to
the attention of the department
THE attorney general further in
formed counsel that he had given di-
rections to have the cases pressed for
conviction and to urge the imposition
of sentences of Imprisonment upon the
/ principal offenders In case OF conVlc-
ton.
! THE following day the defendants
( appeared in court in Pittsburg and in
| terposed pleas of nolle contendre, and
despite the opposition of the district
attorney and Special Assistant Grosve-
nor, the court only fined each of the
Individual defendants $500 and the cor
| poration $500 and costs.
1T was stated to the court that the
combination had been dissolved and this
was one of the considerations on which
the court let the defendants go on
! fine merely. 1t also was stated that
the combination in its existence had
! increased the wages of the glass blow
ers and. as a matter of fact, the direc-
tors minutes disclosed the adoption of
one resolution increasing wages 12h
/ per cent
whether this was carried out or not
did not apepar. but at all events, as
the combination had earned about 400
uer cent profit on its capital stock dur
| ing the year of its existence, an in
crease of 121k per cent in wages can
hardly be considered as so entirely de-
pendent upon the continued existence
Of the combination as to justify re-
duction of 80 per cent in wages, upon
the dissolution of the combina ton"