The sun., 1914-09-18
NEW HAVEN ANSWERS
GOVERNMENTS SUIT
Admits Acquisition Of Subsid-
iaries. but Denies I'm
lawful Intent.
ACTED FOR PUBLIC GOOD
Calls Combination Necessary to
End Chaotic Condition in
New England.

In answers fled in the United States !
District Court yesterday the New Haven |
abroad admits the allegations made by |
he Government In its recent sherman law |
dissolution suit. In 80 far az those allie |
xations charge the ownership or control |
OF trolley lines. steamboa. companies and
Uther railroads in New England. The alb |
sorption of these properties the answers |
insist. was necessitated by local condi- !
tons and has never brought about AN
unreasonable restraint OF trade.
Tho answers are emphatic In their de- |
Mai of the charge that any unlawful or |
unethical methods were employed In the |
acquisition OF these various subsidiaries.
This denial is regarded by some as an |
indication eat the New Haven. while adj |
herring to ts plan of undergoing "A volun- |
tary dtblution Of Its system. Is at the
same t1le intrenching itself against any
criminal attack on the part of the Gov
ernment.
II was announced last August that an
agreement had been reached between the
Government and the New Haven officials
for settlement Of the suit out OF court
II was made clear by the Department OF
Justice, however, that any such plan
would not stand in the way OF presenta-
ton by the Government TO the Federal
Grand Jury In this district of charges
against the men alleged to be responsible
for the New Haven's condition
Followed state Laws.
All the properties of the New Haven
eystern the answers state. were acquired
I'm accordance with and subject to the
express provisions Of the States of Mas
sachusetts. Rhode Island. Connecticut and
New York and In accordance with the
public policy of those States"
The answers also show tendency on
the part OF the defendants to invoke the
statute of limitations. They say that all
the transactions referred to In the GOV
ernments petition took place more than
three years prior to the suit and are
barred by the laws OF the United States
The answers filed yesterday represent
the joint defence OF the New Haven and
the New England Navigation Company
20 the dissolution suit. The answers OF
tho other defendants will be filed later.
The New Haven asserts that there was no
unreasonable restraint Of trade COM
petition within a fair or proper meaning
Of the anti trust Law.
According to the answers the combina-
tion of the various trolley. steamboat and
railroad lines was essential to the SER
Vice and the best interests ot the pub
lic." The combination was also necessary
20 tho existence of the New Haven they
ray. in enabling it TO compete with larger
corporations.
Acted for Public Good,
A. matter OF fact. the defendants say.
the New Havens policy of combination
was modelled after tho policies which
legislative committees, public service cor
porations. railroad and banking associa-
tons have advocated or tried to apply IN
New England for tho good Of the public.
The Transportation problem in New
England, the defendants hold, Is not COM
parable with that in any other part OF
the country because Of the great number
OF large cities and the shortness OF the
haul" These conditions they say. called
FOR the elimination of Independent lines,
and the fact that the New Haven adopted
this policy has been IN no small measure
responsible for the development OF New
England.
Before the combination was effected.
the answers say. the old Colony system
and the Concord Montreal and Rutland
had no southern or western connection at
New York city or the Canadian border.
BY purchasing the Merchants and Miners
steamship Company the New Haven, ac-
cording to the answers. was enabled to
protect its low rates between New Eng
land and the South and West. Moreover
the answers say. the New Haven, con-
trary TO the charges made by the Govern
ment, has regulated It's steamship and
railroad rates so that the New England
merchant would not he at a disadvantage
IN competing with the New York mer-
chant
Prior Competition Denied.
Emphatic denial is made in the an
swers of the Governments assertion that
prior to the formation of the present
New Haven system there real COM
petition between the various steamship
lines. railroads and trolley lines now
under it's control Any competition that
may have appeared to exist. the defend
ants say was not substantial
AZ to the New Haven's ownership and
answers state that no monopoly In this
. kind Of traffic exists charged In tho
Government complaint In the district
referred 10 south of the Boston and
Albany road and west OF "a line from
Providence 10 Fitchburg and the adja-
cent portion of New York State.
Moreover, the answers hold. the Sher-
man law could not without violating the
Constitution prohibit the New Haven
from controlling these trolley lines. since
each was bought by a corporation or
ganized in the State where the line
operated. Therefore the purchase OF the
lines and the subsequent operation by the
special corporations was strictly intra-
state and not within the Jurisdiction oi
any Federal law
No Control of water Trnmc
The Government in it's definition oi
"Nator transportation has put the New
Haven In a wrong light, say the answers
nv omltting to cnumcrate IN It's list oi
such transportation facilities boats plying
btwocn Europe and New England, fer.
yi's, short lines to uoighboring Islands
tramp steamers, bargcs and sailing YES.
sells. Considering these units OF water
transportation, the answers say, the New
Haven only controls 6l per cent. OF tn,
water traffic nf New England
Tho answers dwell on the New
York, Westchestcr and Boston dea
only long enough to state that tho pur
chase ~ this limo and It's controlling line
the New York and Portchestcr. was par
pf a plan Ia allow the New Haven TO enter
New York city by another route and thu
eliminate tho enormous expense incurreC
IIrougn ,le use OF the Grand Central Ter
Inind!.
'inc New Haven, II is asserted neve
opposcd the granting Of franchises I,
these roads nor did II ever harass tn,
roads with litigation.
During the paSt ton years, the New
Haven gays II has reduced It's frcgh
rates to such an extent that the amour
saved by shippers lr the year 1912 wa
Sl,s00,u00. This fact taken IN conjunc
Ion with the Increase In WAGON taxe