The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-12-17

NN'ieiAu'N II rum AA'
firm. Tho withdrawal OF the support
OF this firm from the proposed railroad
was he'd TO have thwarted the roads
construction.
Plainly Common Interest.
True, not all the railroads reached
the new collieries." said the justice
but the pr -servation Of the monopoly
OF transportation from the mines 10
tidewater held by the six lines which
were serving the region was plainly
a common interest The extent Of the
interest of each in the desired result
seems 70 have been estimated BY them
selves as fairly measured by the per
centage % total tonnage heretofore
carried annually by H."
The court dealt with the argument
that no injunction should be Issued
against the Temple Company because
the alleged strangulatiOn OF the pro-
lcctcd railroad was thing OF the past
. The evil is in the combination, de-
ciared Justice Lurton. 80 long as the
defendants are able TO exercise the
power thus illegally acquired, II may
DE- most efiic.i ently eXerted for the con-
tinued and further suppression OF com
in combination may absorb the remain
ing output Of inde pendent producers.
without il the several groups OF
cOal-carrying and coal producing
companies have the power and motive
10 compete. That each may Tor 1t
self advance the price of coal or cut
down the production is true But IN
the power which each group would
have 10 compete would De found
corrective. The Temple Company
therefore afforded a powerful agency
by means OF which the unlawful pur-
pose which induced the acquisition
may be continued beyond the mere
operation OF the Simpson & watkins
cOllieries."
He especially called attention TO the
tact tina; the railroad presidents We're
members of the Temple Company
board of directors. and said this re-
lation afforded the time the place
and occasion for concert OF action.
After disposing of the Temple Com
p3ny feature, the justice took up the
contracts with the independents. re-
ferred to as the 80 per cent CON
tracts. because the railroad companies
were TO pay that percentage of the
price of coal at tidewater 20 the IN
dependents" for their coal
The justice declared II was plainly
esta blished' that these contracts were
made by concert. and the plain de-
duction" was that the contracts were
designed 20 control the sale of the
independent output The court there
fore held them void.
Action Deferred.
Whether the Department or justice
will undertake further investigation OF
the coal situation has not been deter
mined. Numerous complaints nave
been received alleging restraint OF
trade as being accountable for the
high prices OF coal rhis fall ard winter
in certain sections OF the country. &C
ton on these has been deferred pend
ing the decision handed down to-day
The decision" said Attorney Cen
eral Wickersham. III his statement to-
night marks the close OF 4 ten-year
combination controlling the production,
shipment and marketing of anthracite
coal. The bill was hled after an IN
vestigatfon by the Interstate Commerce
Commission. Suit was brought IN
Philadelphia in June. 1907. Il is be-
lieved that this decision will so com
pleteIy destroy ihc combination when
now controls the price OF anthracite
coal that it must result in a distinct
measure of relief TO the PUBLIC