The Washington times., 1911-10-29

written and unwritten. to maintain
prices and stiie competition is alleged
every known product OF iron and steel,
from rails and bridges and structural
forms down to rods, wire, and nails. is
alleged to be controlled by some pool
ceeolng calls for a decree not only
against the corporation itself but
against every element of 1t. collectively
ana ana Individually: Every constituent
illegal, a monopoly, and an attempted
monopoly. under the Sherman law, and
me Government prays that all shall be
dissolved. In other words It asks that
the entire constructive work of years
with these combinations shall be un-
done. and that has very much the ap-
pearance Of chaos for the iron and
steel industry II the Government wins.
The Corporations Defense.
or course the outcome Of this tre-
mendous suit cannot be foretoid. The
steel Corporation has a good defense,
but the case may iinger In the courts
for years despite the certificate Of pub
lie Importance" filed by Attorney Gem
eral Wickersham to accelerate the pro-
ceedings. While the corporation will, no
doubt. operate freely throughout the
pendency Of the suit be It long or short,
Just as the Standard OIL and the Ameri-
can Tobacco Company, and others, have
operated. cloud Is thrown over its
securities. and In this respect the case
Is different than with other concerns
sued. the securities Of which were Of high
price and relatively limited distribution
has been the most active low-priced
speculative issue on the Exchange for
years. while the preferred has been q
popular moderate cost investment. Upon
the 12o, 900 shareholders Of the company
the suit must exert a disturbing infu-
ence.
To assert that the Steel Corpora ton
has restricted industry in any common
sense application of the word 10 ridicu-
lous. for under its operations both do
nestle production and export shipments
OF iron and steel have expanded enor-
mously. That II may be guilty of a
technical violation OF the Sherman anti
trust act may be the case. but that act
for years remained practically a dead
letter; the Government did not invoke 1t
when any OF the trusts were formed,
and It's recent Interpretation by the su-
preme Court Is so vague and indefinite
that corporations, attempting to adjust
their affairs under II are already in a
legal snarl. The Steel trust constitutes
no monopoly In the usual sense Of that
term. for 1t has less than 50 per cent
country. and II has many competitors
who, by the way. have lodged no COM
plant against II OF oppressive and un-
fair dealings.
Arguments Pro and Con.
1t is quite true that the Steel company
has endeavored to give stability to a
great industry, but, In so doing II has
not restricted prices In a manner that
has been burdensome to the general con-
sumner. In this particular. probably the
most vulnerable feature has been the
maintenance OF steel rails at $2s a ton.
irrespective OF the fluctuations in price
Of pig iron or Bessemer steel, but, as
explained to the Stanley committee, or
some one or other OF the numerous In
vestigators Of the corporation. the quail
ity of rails has been much improved In
recent years. and the fixed price is held
to be a fair price for the higher speci-
fication OF rails demanded by the rail-
ways. The control OF ore bodies and Of
ore transportation lines in the North