The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1912-12-17
SUPREME COURT
HITS COAL TRUST
A SEVERE BLOW
Holds That Agreements Made
BY Railroads Shut Out
independents
LEAVES WAY OPEN :.
FOR SH. RMAN LAW
Decision Rules that Opera
tors Acted With Intent Oh
OF | e,training Inter-
State Commerce

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1.-THE end
OF The ten years light against tine an
thracIte coal trust. Was reat he'd TO-DAY
when The SUPP eme court 81 the United
States handed down <e.ision. the
effect of which will be to .estioy the
combination which now controls the
prlce of coal.
The case was brought by the gov
eminent against the Reading and other
railroads charging them with Illegal
combination to control the price OF
anthracite. and with having conspired
to shut out competing lines, said ACT
being In restraint Of Interstate COM
nerce.
In the opinion of the department OF
Justice IL will now only be necessary
TO bring actions under the Sherman
antitrust law against the competing
railroad, the New lorK. wyoming and
altogether. A way for such actions
was distinctly lett open by the de-
cis!on. which was handed down by JUS
lice. lsurtons .a...,, ,a.s.. . .,s,..
Although asserting that as yet the
existence of an illegal combination
am.nS the railroads has not yet been
established. the court holds:
Finding Of Court.
First. That The rrincipal Defendants
1.-THE Reading and other coal carrying
roads,, did combine for the purpose
OF shutting out from the anthrac.te
field = projected independent tine OF
railroad, the New Work Wyoming and
Western. To accomplish this purpose
the stock OF the Temple Iron company
aud the simpson and Watkins Col
lieries was acquired with the intent not
of normally and lawfully developing
trade, hut of restraining Interstate
commerce and competition.
Second That certnln noRkEaEtS msds
with producers covering b&f ween
twenty and twenty-five per cent Of the
fetal annual supply OF coal. known
AS the saxfy-tipe per cent contracts.
while legal. taken stngly, were iiiesa'
taken together. These contracts
bound the producers TO deliver the
outnn, a. their mines to the railroad
company for sixty~tive per cent OF me
average price at ttdewater. Ths con-
tracts were declared void. because IN
violation OF the antitrust act, and
abnormal and ilieyal restraints upon
interstate commerce.
Cites Standard Oil Case.
Third. The court reiterates the de-
cisicn on The Standard On cases, ina
che ACT 81 congress does not forbid or
restrain the power TO make norman
contracts 70 further trade ~ resortihs
10 normal methods, whether ny agree
-trt4Ht otherwise But II holds ina !
the Temple Iron company case. aha
the sixty Ave per cent contracts were
Illegal. and, therefore, GENE "ith'n ''e
antitrust statute.
FOURTH. Certain minor contracts
claimed TO be in violation OF the act
arc dismissed on the ground that the
court has no right to consider them
ptyested Of technically the de-
eJston breaks up the iron clad mo-
nonoIy secured by the raiir oads
through the purchase of the Temple
Iron company and the Simpson and
watkins Galleries.; declares snat tne
cut-throat contracts made WITH the
coa, companies must be cancelled.
and ope~s the way for the depart
ment of justice to proceed against the
railroads for combining through con-
troll of each others stock under the
Sherman antitrust law. precedent
for favorable action by the court In
suits Of this kind to be MED by the
government was furnished lately DIV
the decision In the Hartman merger
case.
Most Important in Years.
rarded as the most important. so far
ne the general public is concerned
that has been rendered ythe court
in many years. not excepting the
Standard OIL, Tobacco trust. and rail-
road merger cases.
by the department II Justice II was
hailed with, much satisfaction, and II
was animated that suits to complete
the derroiition Of the trust will be be-
gun within very short time.
The decision Is OF great length,
numbering more than thirty-five
tbousand W ords. Justices Hughes. Day
and Pitnev took no part, but there
was no dissent. A synopsis OF the
opi-ion follows:
..Th,s Ia a petition to enforce the
provisions OF the act OF July 1. 1890
the sherman antitrust act. agairst m
alleged combination OF railroads and
c,al mining companies formed and
cont nned for the purpose OF restraint
OF competition in the production. sale
and transport alton Of anthracite coal
amo~g the States.
These carriers not only dominate
the transportation OF coal from the
anthracite region to the great dis
tributing ports OF New York harbor
hut also through their control Of this
coal producing companies. produce
and sell about rs per cent OF the an
nual supply OF anthracite ccal.
Hold D Monopoly.
.Turther. M direct consequence
OF state auth Gritty for the ariance
between ronl producing and coal
TRANSPORTATION companies. II has come
about that the defendant carrier COM
panies and the coal mining afiiliated
with the carrier companies now own
or control about 90 per cent Of the
entire urmired area Of anthracite
coal. This IL distributed: Reading,
~ per cent: Lehsgh. 1857 per cent;
Delaware. Lackawanna and Western.
SIS per cent; New Jersey Central,
10 per cent; Erie. $3.50 per cent: New
York Susquehanna and Western. "a
per cent Independent coal COM
panies hold about 80 per cent.
III IL aid" continues the court.
.sthat the independent operators no
tCoatjnasa % gscond PagA1