Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1911-06-08
GARY QUESTIONED
BY THE COMMITTEE
considered it as imperative if finan-
Continued From Page ~

i
cial cataclysm was to be avoided.
In re-opening the line Of question
ing with reference to the Tennessee
Coal and Iron company, Representa-.
tive Littleton sought to get from Mr..
Gary an understanding as to what
phraseology they could agree upon to
express the attitude Of President
Roosevelt to the transaction which
Mr.. Gray and Mr.. Prick proposed to
him in 1907.
II should say said Mr.. Gary, that
it was tacit acquiescence on the part
of the president
Mr.. Ltttleton then took up the visit
to the white house made by Mr.. Gary
and Mr.. Prick.
III President Roosevelt and Mr..
Root, then secretary Of state, had oh,
jected to this transaction" suggested
Representative Bartlett of Georgia
would the United States steel cor
poration still have purchased the Ten
nessee company"
II think 1 surely would have voted
against the purchase" Mr.. Gary re-
piled.
you were at the white house them"
asked Mr.. Littleton, seeking the ap-
prevail Of the administration of the
proposed acquisition by the steel cor
poration of Tennessee coal and iron
stock?" ,,,.,a
LlttIeton Presses Witness.
THAT is not quite rightly put" an
swered Mr. Gary. ut is hardly &C
curate. We sought to acquaint the
government with all the facts before
we proceeded. knew perfectly we'll
that Secretary Root had told the presi-
dent and that the president understood
that he had no right to approve the
sale. But 1t seemed clear to me that
If we should purchase the property
under the perilous conditions in Wall
street as explained to the president,
that there ought not to be any action
on the part Of the government to en-
join the transaction"
Mr.. Gary discussed this situation at
length and stated further that it was
the unanimous opinion Of the steel
corporation directors and the big bank
ers in New York, including Mr.. L-organ
that the administrations attitude to-
ward the deal should be definitely
known.
"You knew at that time" said Mr..
Littleton, that the Sherman antitrust
law made 1t the duty Of the attorney
general to bring Injunction suits to
prevent the consummation of this bust
ness combination which would
amount to a violation of the law, did
you not? You knew that the Sherman
law does not give to an injured party
the right to bring proceedings and
that the attorney general was the
only, source from which such proceed
ings could emanate?"
We'll I do not know that was suf-
flciently familiar with the law to de-
termine that such was the CASE" Mr..
Gary replied.
Felt Consent Gave Immunity.
Well, you felt, did you not" Mr.. Lit
tleton persisted, that with the approx.
val of the president and the attorney
general Of the taking over of the steel
corporation of the Tennessee company.
the attorney general being the only
one who could proceed with such Il
transaction, and waving action under
the provisions Of the antitrust law,
there would be no proceedings in
court?'
THAT Is only your conclusion" said
Mr.. Gary, and perhaps 1t is not stat
ing the situation exactly"
II have felt under the circumstances
the president, having stated to Mr.. Flick
and myself that he did not feel like
Directing to the deal and that he could
see no reason for public criticism in
that attitude, that any proceedings in
court afterward would have been I'M
just"
'In other words said Mr.. Little
ton, you were Of the opinion that had
the attorney general proceeded, such
action would have been an outrage?"
II would say" Mr.. Gary replied,
"that such prosecution OF an alleged
violation do not admit that 1t was a
yiolation-of the Sherman law at that
time would have been most unjust"