The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1912-05-22
OF
BRIDGE COMPANY
TOLD BY ROBERTS
Denies Company Was Or
ganized With Idea of
Mon0polizati0n
NO NEGOTIATIONS
WERE NECESSARY
Morgan Got Control of Company
Without Official Action-Testi-
mony Fails to Uphold Answer
Made by the Corporation

New York, May a.=Percival Roberts.
Jr, director of the United States Steel
corporation. a member of its finance COM
mittee and defendant in the government
suit to dissolve the corporation under the
Sherman antitrust act, testified concern
ing the organization of the American
Bridge company at the continuation of the
hearing today.
Mr.. Roberts, who was president of the
bridge company when 1t was taken over
hy the Steel corporation in 1901, denied the
company was originally organized with
the object of monopolizing the industry
He said that at that time u9OO. the COM
panys output amounted to only IS per
cent of the entire output of the country.
that this percentage had fallen to 81 per
cent a year ago and that the company
now only owned about 20 plants, against
$40 Independent plants. Though admit
ting that some of the original constitu-
ents of the company were competitors.
they were combined, he said, solely to do
larger business.
Fails to Support Answer
The Steel corporation in its answer to
the goverpment's suit says of the organ
ization of the bridge company that the
size and character of the structures built
required larger capital and greater skill
than could be commanded by small con-
Germs" Mr.. Roberts failed to support
tins argument when questioned by r. V
Lindabuly, counsel for the corporation,
stating that several of the constituent.
concerns were entirely capable of handling
structures built at that time.
The steel director could not furnish the
government lawyers information about
alleged contracts entered into with owners
Of constituent companies taken over, linn
iting their territorial operations, but tes-
titled to the existence of a contract be-
tween the bridge company and the Car
negie Steel company, under which the
Carnegie company was TO supply the
bridge company materials at advanta-
geous prices and itself cease. fabricatiug
bridge work as long as the bridge COM
panys output excesds two-thirds of seae
sornsFs |. %Sss sput; '.t; ;,,,...
committee had considered fostering n
| condition of several small bridge com
panes outside the American Bridge com
pany into another company which would
work to the advantage of the American
Bridge company, was revealed by the
| minutes of an executive committee meet
ing. The minutes stated that Mr.. Rob-
ground that although the small concerns
don't amount to- much now, il consolidated
they might become factors"
Matter turned DOWN.
The matter was turned down without
discussion" Roberts testified today.
How j. p. Morgan & Co got control
of the bridge company on behalf OF the
corporation, without any official action
or knowledge of the bridge company's
directors or officials. as the witness de-
clared was an interesting feature of Mr..
Roberts testimony. There were no nego-
] tiations whatever as TO the price at
which the stock was to be sold, he said.
j. J.. Morgan & Co. merely issued a cir
cular offering to exchange Steel corpor-
alton stock for stock of the bridge COM
pany at Sl10 steel preferred and 81 .O5
steel common for par of the preferred
and common stocks of the bridge COM
accented