New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-10

.""'' iVania Railroad directors. he said.
aiso Steel Corporation directors-H.
- 'ch' clement &. Crlscom and himself.
' p''ces OF rails never came before the
o''''ora'e Of either corporation when he
vas present. They were fixed by purchas-
ihs and selling agent.
'i'' Roberts said that once. before he
peca'he steel director. he told President
".''ea or the Pennsylvania Railroad that
p,,es quoted by the Steel Corporation for
.""' oased on new specifications were too
"'"' Al MS instance Mr. McCrea saw Mr..
cdi'' and the Steel Corporation salts
i'c'oiiiy modified it's price" He cited the
Dsia"s OF the Steel Corporation and the
,enhsyivania Railroad. which prohibited
directors from voting on contracts between
the two companies.
Inc testimony Of SIR. Roberts interrupted
mat OF James Gayley. formerly a vice.
president Of the Steel CORPORATION. Mr..
Roberts wanted TO return to Pittsburg to-
night. so Mr.. Gayicy was halted with tie
understanding that he will resume on
Tuesday.
GayIey on Steel Rail Prices.
Mr.. Gayley gave the history Of the Car
negie Steel Company from 1885, to 1901. when
the Steel Corporation was formed. He de-
stribed periods OF destructive competition
and the ultimate progress and development
OF the Carnegie Company. as well as new
methods OF manufacturing steel and their
effect In advancing the values OF steel
PROPERTIES.
Asked as to the price of raila IN the early
period. Mr.. Gsy,ey said that the price usu-
ally was fixed in conference with railroad
officials chiefly those OF the Pennsylvania
Railroad.
Were there any agreements as to prices
In those days." asked Representative
Young.
I'm those DAYS all the steel companies
were Independent" said Mr.. Gayley. "and
there were periods OF war so destructive
that agreements were necessary In order
for all to recoup. Then would come other
destructive wars. Agreements were neces-
sary from time 10 time. or ultimately one
company would have secured a monopoly
OF the business"
Mr.. GaylCy said he had no PERSONA
knowledge that Andrew Carnegie hao
threatened to build tube mill at Conneaut
for the purpose Of forcing the Morgan IN
tcrests to buy out the plant, az charged
by John W. Gates.
The Carnegie Company had purchased
land at Conneaut. he said. for a new plant
but 1t vas not determined whether tune
works or wire mill would he erected the
r,rnoco of huilIinC either he said. Woulu
have been to furnish an outlet for the ste"l
Of tie Carnegie works near Pittshure'
which had formerly been taken by the Ma
tional Tube Company. a Morgan enter
prise.
There has been a statement. or a ru-
NOR" said Representative Young. "tha'
Mr.. Carnegie's proposal to build tube
mill was not In good faith: that it was
really threat 10 aid him In acquiring
other property or TO force others 20 buy
him out. DC you know the facts?'
No Threat to Build Tube Mill.
There was no proposal Ia any one. said
Mr.. Gayley. "and there was certainly no
threat to build tube mill The Carnegie
company went ahead to carry out plans it
had determined upon: but it had never been
decided whether a tube n: whether wire
mill would he constructed.
The National Tube Company had ceased
to he a customer Of tho Carnegie works,
having constructed it's own blast furnaces.
The witness added that it was not known
that Mr.. Morgan was interested in the Ma
tional Tube Company until after the United
States Steel Corporation was organized.