Amarillo daily news. [volume] (Amarillo, Tex.) 19??-current, 1912-12-17
HARD COAL CASE
DECIDED At LAST
GOVERNMENT WINS A PAR.
TIAL VICTORY IN SU-
PREME COURT.
MANY CONTRACTS ILLEGAL
COURT REFUSED TO DECLARE
CONSPIRACY EXISTED IN
TEMPLE COAL AND
IRON SUIT.

WASHINGTON. ID. c., Dec. l6.-|
The government won only partial
victory In the hard coal case before
the United States Supreme Court
today. when decision was given
that 60 per cent contracts between
hard coal roads and operators were
Illegal
The court sustained the govern
ment's victory in the Temple Coal
and Iron case but refused TO declare
II conspiracy existed.
Todays decision had It's genesis in
the action begun by the government
in 1907 in the United States Circuit
Court for Eastern Pennsylvania
The action was brought against
the big factors in the hard coal
trade. The list OF defendants was
headed by the Reading Company, a
holding corporation The railroads
made defendants were the Philadel-
phia q Reading the Lehigh Valley.
the Delaware. Lackawanna q West
ern, the Central Railroad Co, OF
New Jersey. the Erie Railroad co,
and the New York. Susquehanna and
Western. The Pennsylvania and the
New York, Ontario and Western, two
other important roads in the hard
coal field. were not included in the
suit other defendants were coal
companies affiliated with the railroad
defendants. aud thirty-two "indepen-
/ dent operators who had entered in
10 contracts 10 sell their output for
ever to the railroads or their "afflli-
/ ated" coal companies.
In its suit the government charg-
ed first the existence OF a general
combination IN violation OF the
Shsrma. yFnittrust law. and then
I'cii'e 4ed ha, we eral smaller couioi-
nalions within the big one we're not
only In violation OF the law them
selves. but constituted evidence OF
a general combination
The general combination was all
legged 10 have for It's object the end.
ing OF competition among the defen.
dant railroads In the transportation
and sale of anthracite coal. and OF
preventing the sale Of the output oi
Independent operators In competition
with the defendants coal The com
bination. it was alleged, transported
- per cent OF the anthracite Goa
moving from the mines controlled
over 81 per cent Of all the anthracite
in the ground. and produced 60 pei
cent and marketed 20 per cent of th'
annual output The lower court wal
unanimous In holding that there
existed no general combination n
violation OF law.
One OF the special things com
planned OF In the suit was the sys
tenn OF 90 per cent contracts.
whereby the railroad coal com
panies agreed 20 pay the 'indepen
dents" forever g. per cent OF tn
price OF coal AT New York habor
The lower court held these contract
did not violate the law
Control. through stock ownership
by the Reading Company OF m
Philadelphia & Reading Railway CO
and the Central Railroad Co. of Ne'
Jersey, described as competitive In
terstate carriers. and also OF IN
Philadelphia G Reading Coal
Iron Company and the Lehirh an
wilkes Barre Coal Company, wa
alleged 20 constitute comblnatio
in restraint OF 'rads and monopo
ization in violation of the Sherma
law.
The lower court held that In thi
there had been uo violation OF IN
law
Control through stock ownershi
by the Erie Railroad Company q
tho New York susquehanna a Wes
ern Railroad Co. was alleged
! constitute another violation OF N
law. the lower court held again'
the government on this point