Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-02-01
Corporation and Subsidiaries
Deny They Violated Law

Absolute denial of violations of the anti
trust law Is made by the United States
Steel Corporation, it's subsidiaries and
directors in their answers filed today in
the United States district court at Tren-
ton, N. j., to the governments dissolu-
ton suit. Five separate answers were
filed for thirty three defendants.
The effect of its organization the cor
poration declares, has been to cheaper
production, effect economies and increase
foreign trade from 5000, 900 to $50, OOO.OOO
annually within ten years So long has
| the government acquiesced in it's exist
ence, the answer says, that it is now too
late, as a matter of equity, to insist that
| it's organization was illegal.
Nothing was withheld from President
| Roosevelt by Messrs. Gary and F'rck No
vember 4, 1907, the answer says, when
| they sought his consent to the corpora
| tons proposed purchase of the Tonnes
| see Coal, Iron and Railroad Company;
| nor were the so-called Gary dinners pro-
ductive of agreements to regulate prices.
The answers are those of the steel cor
poration. Andrew Carnegie, John d.
| Rockefeller, ST.: John D. Rockefeller, jr.,
| and Edmund c. Converse. The ROckefel-
lers make joint answer.
Deny Taking Active Part.
The Messrs. Rockefeller deny that they
| had an active part in the formation or
| management of the corporation, the elder
| Rockefeller declaring that he has had no
| immediate relation to the iron or steel
business since 1901.
Mr.. Carnegie says he had no part in the
plans for organizing the corporation and
no voice, direct or advisory, in its man.
agement He admitted selling the Car
| negie Steel Company to the United States
Steel Corporation, but denies that the ac-
| QUESTION by the Carnegie company of its
subsidiaries was in restraint of trade.
Mr. Carnegie, in addition. denies that the
net value of the Carnegie company De-
cember 81, 1899, was only $50, 600. 1O4. 46, as
alleged In the governments petition. He
AYERS that the one option H. c. Frick
had upon the Carnegie company involved
the payment to Carnegie of $157, $4,000.
The answer of Edmund c. Converse a
director Of the United States Steel Cor
poration, is similar to the corporation 8
answer.
Each Of the defendants prays that the
suit be dismissed.
Answers Now Completed.
The answers. with those filed Monday
by the Minnesota group of land and min
ing companies and five individuals named
| as trustees, complete the answers from
all fifty-six defendants named in the suit.
The next step will be the filing of replica
| tons by the government. which must be
done within thirty days, unless an extern
sion of time is granted After that a COM
missioner will be appointed to take tes.i-
| mony.
| The answer of the United Steel Corpo-
| ration is made in the name of the COM
bination and its various subsidiary COM
panies, and it Is joined in by the follow
| ing individuals: ]. Pierpont Morgan,
Ebert II. Gary, Charles NJ. Schwab,
Charles Steele. Henry c. Prick, James
Gayley, William H. Moore, James H.
Moore Percival Roberts, jr., Daniel G.
kins and Peter A. B. Widener
The array of counsel includes Linda
bury, Depue & Fauks. as solicitors, and
Joseph III. Choate, John G. Johnson,
Francis Lynde Stetson, David A. Reed
Raynal c. Boiling, and Richard v. Linda
bury.
Organization of Corporation.
| The answer begins with reviewing the
events that led up to the organization Of
| the present steel corporation and de-
scribes how the Federal Steel Company
acquired the Carnegie Steel Company, the
American Steel and Wire Company and
others through negotiations conducted by
J. P. Morgan & Co. Later, when the
need for additional ore supplies was felt
| the steel corporation acquired the prop
critics of the Lake Superior Consolidated
| iron mines. The steel corporation was
formed and its properties acquired, the
fecting economies by migrating the
plants and the processes employed In the
manufacture of Steel and to reach the
principal markets of the United States