New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-08

mod. an bis mind and the minds OF those
with him was that both Mr.. Koose'e' anu
MFR Root fully recognized the necessity io'
the merger and accepted II as impera''e
70 q financial cataclysr1 was TO De aVe''e'
REPRESENTATIVE .Littleton sought 70 get
from Mr. Gary an understanding as 10
What phraseoloey they could agree on 10
ovpress tho attitude OF President Roosevelt
to the transactions which MT. gary ""'
Mr.. Frick proposed to him In 1871
II should say" said Mr. cary INA, y
was tacit acquescence on the part oi '"e
President" -
OF President Roosevelt and Mr. ROOT
then Secretary Of state, had op)ec'ea "
this transaction" suggested Representative
Bartlett. OF Georgia. would the Ch'te"
States Steel Corporation SUI nave pun
chased the Tennessee Coal ana iron |o'N
pany?"
81 think I surely would have voted
against the purchase" Mr.. Gary fepl'eo'
you were at the White House. were you
not" Mr.. Littleton continued, seeking the
approval Of the administration OF the pro-
nosed ACQUISITION by the Steel Corporation
Of Tennessee Coal and Iron stock!
That is not quite rightly put, answered.
Mr.. Gary. 1T Is hardly accurate. VIC
sought to acquaint the government WITH al
the facts before We proceeded. knew per
fectIv well that Secretary Root had toid
the President and that the PRESIDENT "h-
ders,ood that he had no right to approve
the sale But it seemed clear 10 me 'hd'
il we should purchase the properly uhoe'
the perilous conditions In wall street aS
explained to the President. there ought not
to be any action on the part OF the govern
ment TO enjon the transaction
Mr. Gary discussed this situation AT
length. and said 1t was the unanimous
opinion OF the Steel Corporation directors
and the leading bankers in New York In
Guiding Mr. Morgan, that the admnistra-
tion's attitude toward the deal should be
definitely known.
The Deal and the Sherman Law.
You knew at that time said Mr.. Lit
Teton. that the Sherman antitrust law
made It the duty Of the Attorney General
TO bring injunction suits TO prevent the
contamination Of business combinations
which would amount to violation OF the
law. did you not? You knew that the
Sherman law does not give TO an injured
party the right 10 bring proceedings and
that the Attorney General was the only
source from which such proceedings could
emanate?"
well, I do not know that I was sufti-
GENTLY familiar with the law to determine
that such was the case" Mr.. Gary replied.
well. YOU felt, did you not" Mr.. Little
ton persisted that with the approval OF
the President and the Attorney General OF
the taking over by the Steel Corporation
of the Tennessee company. the Attorney
General being the only one who could pro-
coed against such transaction, and waiv-
ing action under the provisions Of the anti
trust law. there would be no proceedings in
court?"
That is your conclusion" said Mr.. Gary.
land perhaps it is not stating the situation
exactly | felt that, under the crcum-
stances, the President having stated TO
Mr.. Frick 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, any proceedings in court
afterward would have been unjust.
In other words" said Mr.. Littleton.
'vou were of the opinion that had the
Attorney General proceeded such action
would have been an outrage? I believe
YOU used the word before the committee
in that connection the other day."
Il would say" NJ. Gary replied. that
such prosecution of an alleged violation
I do not admit that it was a vioation-of
the Sherman law at that time would have
been most unjust"
Alleged Coal Deal Denied.
Charges alleged to have been made by
Senator Oliver Of Pennsylvania, that the
United States Steel Corporation Is endeav-
oring to get control OF water transportation
on the Ohio River through absorption OF
the Pittsburg Coal and Coke Company and
the Monongahea River Company were pre-
sented by Robert G. Hall, of Pittsburg.
Mr. Gary replying TO questions by Chair
man Stanley, denied that the Steel Cor
poration had any such plans in mind.
Statements have been made by Sena-
tor of the United States who has personal
interest in the Pittsburg Coal and Coke
Company" said Chairman Stanley, that
the Monongahea River Company is now
under the control of the PittsburS Coal and
Coke Company, and that there is now
pending a proposition to exchange the Sc
c,vities Of these two companies for the
bonds Of the United States Steel Corpora
ton. with the inevitable result that the
Ohio River will cease TO be the medium OF
traffic for the carriage OF this tonnage, OF
coal"
Members OF the committee and attorneys
for Mr.. Gary asked Chairman Stanley to
name the Senator Mr.. Stanley responded
by calling Mr. Hall to the stand. The wit
ness said he was a former president of the
Pittsburg Stock Exchange. He :old the
history of the two companies. and said
that the Steel Corporation has twenty-five
wear contract for coal at a price that rep
resented a loss to the mining companies.
4 deal is pending, he said, for the transfer
TO the Steel Corporation Of large acre
age Of coal. to be paid for in bonds guar
anteed by the Steel Corporation.
There is no doubt in my mind" Mr.. Hall
declared that the deal means the ultimate
shipment Of all coal I'm our district by rail
and the eradication Of water competition.
Senator Oliver agrees with this view"
Mr.. Hall has offered no evidence that
we are getting control Of these companies"
said Mr.. Gary.
Your contract is better than ownership
would be" replied Mr.. Hall; 1t is cheaper
to get the coal at your price than TO own
the companies"
Mr. Hall testified that the Pittsburg Coal
and Coke Company. known as the rail
company" in the Pittsburg coal field. con-
trolls the Monongahela River company.
which ships by river.
I'VE have no thought OF acquiring control
or an interest in either one OF these COM
panies" said Mr. Gary. We have no in