New-York tribune., 1912-12-17
COAL ROADS GRIP
SHAKEN BY COURT
Continued from first page.

only six members. Justice Day took
no part I'm the decision because OF niS
absence fro mthe bench when the case
was argued In October 1911. Juslce
Hughes refrained from participants III
the action of the court because he was
a special assistant TO the Attorney
General when the coal business was
first investigated by the government
Justice Pitney was not on the peHcn
when the case was presented to the
court.
The suit was sent back to the Judges
OF the court i'm which it originated the
Circuit Court for Eastern Pennsyl-
vania. for the enforcement Of the decl-
sion.
The railroads concerned in the case
we're the Philadelphia & Reading 'he
Lehigh Valley, the Delaware, LacKa-
wanna & Western, the Central Raii-
road Of New Jersey, the Erie and the
New York. Susquehanna Sc western
The minor combinations not passeu
upon. but left for possible future coh-
sideration. were those alleged to nave
been created in 1898 by the absorp-
tion Of the New York, Susquehanna &
Western by the Erie; in l9Ol' by Tue
acquisition by the Reading COMPANY
which owned the philadelphia & Read
ing Railroad, and a coal company oy
similar name, of the Central OF Ne"
Jersey. with it's coal companies; u
1899. by the acquisition by the Erie
Of the Pennsylvania Coal company
ubicb is said TO have been projecting
a new railroad, the Delaware Nalley
& Kingston.
States Policy Liberal.
Al the outset of his opinion Justice
Lurton dwelt upon the great iaclor VI
the six railroads and their coal com
panies in anthracite mining. over 0o
nor cent of the entire unmined area OF
anthracite was owned by them, he de-
cIared. and over - per cent OF the
annual supply put upon the marA"'
WAS theirs. He said that the renleh-
dous influence OF these companies III
this business was due 10 the llperai
policy Of the state OF Pennsylvania 10
encourage coal development by author-
izinp an alliance between the coal pro-
ducing and the coal transporting COM
panies As 10 the transportation OF
the coal TO tidewater. the great us
tributing centre. Justice Lurton SAID
that independent Of any agreement or
combination. the six railroads were IN
undisputed control. lie added:
The situation is one which invites con
cerfsd action and makes cNCeediuBly Easy
the accomplishment OF any puIPoso "
dotniuate the supply and c0ntroi tht
49, a. tbo aaa board The one-fourtu
suppIv which comes from lndepenuen,
,,srators has been sold in competition
with the larger supply OF the utltilua'' y, 30
II by concert Of action that souICs ~
cor1notitiou be removed, the mohopoly
MIN tIc defendants. acting together
may exert over production ana sa'e VI"
be- complete.
with this situation outlined, the JUS
tice proceeded TO see WHAT h"" w
CURED. He first considered the charge
OF a general combination" to apporuoh
output Reliance was made he sald' III
support Of this charge, upon the cor
ference Of railroad presidents In 1870
when il was averred that efforts were
made to distribute the coal business
uron the basis Of the amount carried
i'm previous years.
"The weight of proof declared JUS
tice Iurton. satisfies us that, whatever
might have been contemplated or at
tented. the scheme proved abor,lvc,
or IN attempted. was abandoned long
before the bill was fled
other charges Of general combina-
tiop II was declared, had been properly
considered by the lower court, and
while the Supreme Court had gone
through the record, 1t would not dis-
cuss them.