The Washington herald., 1912-12-17
Supreme Court Holds Temple Iron
Company Unlawful Combination
Under Sherman Law.
sUsTAINs LOWER BODY;
ORDERS CONTRACTS ANNULLED
Government Agents Pleased with
Dicision Although Entire Suit
Is Not Sustained.

lof- more than year, handed GOWN lts
decision yesterday I'm the Anthracite
Coal case. Six members Of the court
who participated in the case unanimously
agreed on an opinion which affirms the
decree of the lower court, declaring the
Temple Iron Company to be an unlawful
combination in restraint of trade and
goes still further by ordering the annul-
| ment of the so-called ''65 per cent con-
tracts, agreements which amount to a
perpetual control by the Anthracite roads
of the output Of the independent pro-
ducers of hard coal.
The government believes it won a great
victory by the annulment of these con-
tracts. Attorney General Wickersham
said yesterday that il would break the
backbone of the monopoly Of the supply
of hard coal by releasing about one
fourth OF the total production from the
grasp Of the alleged monopoly. The
lower court refused to annul these con-
tracts. Mr.. Wickersham said yesterday.
after the opinion was read: 1t is be-
lieved that this decision will so complete
ly destroy the combination which now
controls the price of anthracite coal that
it must result in. a distinct measure of
relief to the public"
The effect of the decision Of the highest
court was TO affirm the decree of the
Federal Circuit Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania so far as that
decree dissolved the Temple Iron Com
pany and to reverse the decree of the
lower court with directions that new
decree be entered ordering the annul-
ment Of the So per cent contracts and
enjoining their execution.
Some Disappointment Felt.
But there was manifest disappoint-
ment on part of the governments law
officers because OF the decision of the
court in some of the larger aspects Of
the case. For example. the court held
with the Circuit Court for the Eastern
District OF Pennsylvania, that the gen.
eral combination of conspiracy had not
been proved. 1t refused to decree the
dissolution of the COal-carrying railroads
from their Coal-producing company: it
refused to grant the prayer of the gov
ernment's bill that the Erie Railroad be
required to surrender its stock control
over the New York, SuSquehanna and
Western and that the Philadelphia and
Reading likewise give up its control
through stock ownership OF the Central
of New Jersey and the Lehigh Valley.
The petition so far as it related to these
railroad combinations is held by the
court to involve other causes Of action
and the governments petition is. there
fore, held 10 be Objectionable 10 the
rule against ''multifariousness.
As to these matters. the bill on behalf
of the government IS dissolved without
prejudice and the government is not
precluded thereby from beginning sepa-
rate suits to divorce the Erie from the
or to declare unlawful an
other combination between the Erie and
the Pennsylvania Coal Company, through
which the Erie came into control OF two
branch coal roads, in the anthracite
field and it leaves open the way for the
General to bring an action to
pry away the Central of New Jersey and
the Lehigh Valley from the Reading con-
troll.
Fails to Prove Monopoly.
As to the general combination or mo-
noply. independent of the Temple Iron
Company, the government failed to prove
its case. The Supreme Court agrees with |
the Circuit Court that prior to the for
nation of the Temple Iron Company, the |
six anthracite roads were independent
and competing. Each did a coal busi- |
ness both of mining and transportation
by the aid of subsidiary coal companies |
but until the Temple Iron Company was
formed, and the 65 per cent contracts |
executed, there was no general and COM
plete monopoly.
The railroads named as defendants were
the Philadelphia and Reading, the Lehigh |
Valley, The Delaware. Lackawnna and |
Western, the Central of New Jersey. the |
Erie, and the New York, Susquehanna |
and Western.
Other defendant corporations named |
as parties to the bill were the PhiIa-
delphia and Reading Coal and Iron Com
pany. the Lehigh Valley Coal Company,
The NaW Vorlr
nrn Coal Company, The Lehigh and |
Wilkesbarre Coal Company. the Penn
sylvania Coal Company, the HiIlsdale
Coal Company, and the Reading Com
Dany and the Temple Iron Company. both
holding companies. These defendants
were named in the original bill. Later
n the case an amended petition was
He'd, including as defendants in addi-
ion to those heretofore named, the Della
ware and Hudson Company, and named
'ther coal and mining companies. several
persons as defendants, and the Pennsyl-
'ania Company for insurance on lives
md granting annuities, and the Mer-
.antile Trust Company of New York |
The government alleged and showed
hat these railroad companies named in
he bill, through ownership of coal mines,
controlled about 75 per cent of the an
Iual production of anthracite coal. and
" direct ownership and through subsi-
iary coal companies owned or controlled
0 per cent Of the unmined area OF hard L
oal. 1t is also alleged and proved that
he remaining supply of anthracite coal
mounting to about . per cent, is con-
rolled by independent producers who
we're no longer Independent and COM
citing, because all or nearly all of them
lad entered into contracts with the
arious railroads BY which they agreed
o sell the entire product of their mines
or So per cent of the average market
rice at tidewater. II