The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1912-02-01
3 "a
By CO.. I ON s.

II
increase the trade in steel products
therein E'r
If any Of the companies acquired
~ she Steel Corporation" the am
swerfdeelares. chad been organised
fprr the. purpoae or. with the eject 81
restraining trade or commerce. or e
they constituted an attempt 1T mo-
popoly or a monopollzation OF trade
and commerce, neither the organlzers
o. the Steel Cooperation nor the said
corporation had any knowledge or In
formation thereof whentrhe said COM
panies were acquired. 3f
Continuing. the answer recites that
the Steel 6orporaHon made its puras8
poses and the details OF its>organIza--
ton public in a variety Of ways, and
says that the attention OF the ofiicers
q the United States government was
particularly directed to said orgaui-l
cation at the time 1T was,s efrected.
Only within a few months has any de-
partment or responsible. .oficer of the
government criticized the Steel Cor
poration as being combination in
restrain Of trade, or a monopoly.
The answer, then sets forth that the
Steel corBoratton mas cheapehed the
production OF steel to the coi1sumer;;.I
that 1t has increased is, foreign trade
from 49, 5000 aiu 1901 ta4s$Bo {, 900, j
900 in 1911; that It has .ilatG sup
pressed eampeti tiQpS tibet the number
Eof iitg cpmpetitIi9ns In the United states
\ has largely, Increased ,stnce 1901 and
that Its. stock has been sold Several
times over and is now her6 BY a null
titpde Of small investors in this and
.f0relghA ceuRtTte4 81
= Fhe deFeRdants taen. submit: \.
!. That after acqulescing In, the or.i
ahizattSn - thsh steel Corporation
for so Iongia tiTnetand after rights Of
$50 sacred a character have grown UP
hereunder, and tits now too late for
the government to insist in court OF
equity that SUCH Organization was in
itself and, Without regard, to dts after
practices an, illegal, thing"
The answer further declares that!
the proposition to- purchase a majorf-
ty of the stock Of the Tennessee Coal
and Iron Company tcame, from Grant
p. schley and was taken up on ae-i
count and only on account Of the rep
RESERVATIONS made on behalf Of said
schley that nothing but Such pur-
chase would, Save: Moore & schley
from Failure. % Messsstts. . Gary and
''fFricissf6f the Steel sCeqbofationsiw went
to see lthe president 4ioeq tnesi United
States one the 4ths6f November, 1907, |
sand- laid sthef sttratt dng bNfore.a him.
The answer denisss that iAsessrs.. Gary
apA4 Egicl4 failed ets discl9yea to- the
president AL the facts hearing upon
the proposed pure base or the occasion
for milking the same Which we're per-
tinent thereto. d iii fiat they made any!
HffisstatemqeAnt Or misleading sta'teAhen9I
81 any soTt6r odhar4ctetat6 tho pfesi.
dent rel ardihg2 Bhes iflnancialr sItuatians
I'm New Yorkap .Rgarding the. wishes
bury, DaDpue & Faulke ,ast solicitors
ooEporatian1l M III, 4 respect To the pro-'i
posed ppDshase,f, 4oadHlts that the.
pFssid,ePp3t, stated that he did not, feel
If to be his dYty,to prevent the pro-
posed TRANSACTION and say that in re-!
llance upon said statement Messrs.
Gary and Frick returned i.tou.Newj
York, whereupon the purchase was
completed" Pheeanswer denies. that
the Tennessee Company was a. strong
present or probable future competitor
OF the Steel Corporation at the time
Of its acquisition by the latter
The answer says that continuous
ly since the organization OF the Steel.
Corporation 1t has been the declared
and Srpnsistently followed policy Of
SAID SerpOfation to encourage rather
thaF go RESTRAIN the Stnost freedont
of trade and commerce; TO refrain,
from acts of-oppression or injustice
to the competitors Of said corporation;i
ito abstain from efforts, to, harass isue Ell
competitors or to exclude them from
their fair share Of interstate or for
eign commerce, and toftake no steps
intended or calculated to prevent the
FgrowthaOr other and further competi-
ftiba, and that such, policy has been
! we'll known throughout the Industry
and to the public generally and the
government since the Organization of
i the steel Corboration.'' ~
j Referring to the meetings of the
steel manufacturers, Familiarity known
as the Gary dinners,"s the answer
Esays that at none of these dinners
was there any attempt to reach any
agreement of understanding with re-
spect either to output or prices, nor
was anything said or done which was
calculated or intended to suppress
competition or restrain trade, and
there never was nor is there now any
such agreement or understanding
The concluding portion Of the am
swer Is as follows: q
They deny that they have ever vlo-
lated or attempted or intended to SiO.