The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-06-04

that all materials should be bought ir
 such banks own country.
 Trade Done Jointly Thirty million dollars of the Stee, cor poration s $91,000,000 foreign trade is done jointly with 15s other American manufac- turers
 If the two-fold purpose of the Sherman act Is to foster and protect trade, both
 foreign and interstate, and If foreign trade | cannot be increased without some sucf mechanically varied and financially strong agency as this Steel corporation, ther
 fnanifesuy such agency is not a violation CT statute whose purpose was to permit not to prevent-the normal, natural, and to be desired development of unrest1a lned
 unmonopolized trade, both foreign and domestic
 Tn taking up this question we dismiss ! once and for all the question of mere vei-
 tine or bigness or business. The question before us is not how much business was done or how large the company that did it; the vital question is how WAS the
 business whether big or little, done WAS 1t, in the test of the supreme court, done by prejudicing the public interests. by | unduly restricting or unduly obstrhctlne
 trade? The question is one of undue re- striction or obstruction and not or undue volume of trade.
 If mere size were the test of moiopoiy and trade restraint, we have not one but half a dozen unlawful monopolies in the large departments of a single city. "A study of these proofs satisies us that the United States Steel corpoi ation could not have. been formed unless the minds of two men had united in com mon purpose. Those two men were u. Pierpont Morgan and Andrew Carnegie There is no proof whatever thai MT. Carnegie accepted any other relation than that of seller of his stocks ant aonus In his own company and the statent nt in his answer that his sole motive in agree ing to sale of the property of the Idr- nege Steel company to the United states company was his desire to retire from the hazards and responsibility ot act1Ve business and since such sale he haa had no connection with the business is true History of Case
 The suit against the United states Steel corporation was filed al trenton, S J.. October 26, 1911, during the Ialt administration and was started by George " Wickersham, who was At torney General at the time Prior to the filing of the action the corporation had been under investigation several times. The federal bureau of corporations un : der different administrations delVeti into the operations of the concern and a congressional committee headed by Representative A. O. Stanley Of Ken lucky investigated the alleged trust In preparing the ease for action the de- rartment of justice had the benent or ali these investigations.
 The testimony, exhibits, briefs and written and oral arguments were ex- oeedlngly voluminous. The examiner In the case sat t66 days In nine different cities and heard 4g0 witnesses. Tho testimony made up 56 volumes contain | iEg 15,900 printed pages. There were
 more than 1750 pages of printed argu- ments aside from the voluminous an swers filed by the many defendants, and the oral arguments filled more than 1900 typewriter pages.
 The defendants named in the origl- nal bill of complaint were the Steel corporation, it's subsidiaries, and ]. ?. Morgan deceased Charles Steele George w Perkins, F. H. Gary. Charles M Schwab, Andrew Carnegie. Henry C. Prick James Gayley, William H. Moore J II. Moore, Edmund c. Con- verse, Perciva Roberts. Jr., Daniel G. Reid Norman B. Ream, John D. Rocke- feller, John D. Rockefeller Jr., r. A. R. Widener and William P. Palmer past or present directors of the Steel cor poration, together with certain com panies, known as the James J. Hill in- terests and Louis W: Hill, James N Hill, Walter ]. Hill, Edward T. Nichols J. H. Gruber, who were sued as trus- tees of the Hill companies.
 In brief the general charge against
 the defendants was that some of the companies in themselves were combina- tons in restraint of trade and that the creation of the Steel corporation, which took in the steel and certain other com. jpanies named in the suit, was Ian at. tempt to monopolize and monopoliya ton" in violation of the Sherman anti. l trust law.
 Ore Companies Involved | The Hill ore companies were involved in the suit by reason of the fact thai l the Steel corporation leased the ore de- posits held by the ore companies tn, government alleging that this leas, gave the corporation a monopoly of ths
 ore supply of the United States. This | lease was cancelled after the suit was l filed.
 l The governments complaint stated tha l the Federal Steel company, Carnegie com.
 rany of New Jersey, American Steel ant Wire company of New Jersey, Nationa Tube company, National Steel company American Tin Plate company, American Steeel Hoop company, and American | Sheet Steel company were each com l hinaton of companies or concerns in re | straint of trade; that competition wa | largely eliminated in their respective lines that at the time the United States Sec l corporation was formed the Carnegie 1 Federal and National were In active com l petition with each other; that several o
 the companies were preparing to still fur
 ther increase their capacity to compet' | by establishing themselves along new l lines of manufacture and that for thes' | raa GnnG and fnr ha n
 suppressing competition and controllins | trade and commerce the United State'
 Steel corporation was formed by the direc l tors named in the suit, all of whom excep ] the Rockefellers had been varously con nected with one or more of the com | panies.
 The government further stated thu
 the Steel corporation's capitalization az eregated $1. 4O2, ,s46Sl. that this capitaliza
 ton was not less than s600,0Oo000 in ex | cess of the value of the properties taker 1 over; that its earnings were not com 1 mensurate with it's actual capital, no
 were they entirely the legitimate fruit
 of the earning capacity of the properties acquired, separately controlled. but wer' largely the result of power exerted owe
 trade by such a vast combination.
 | It was further charged by the govern
 nent that many millions of dollars wer' | issued for mere promotion and under
 writing the petition stating that Morgan {
 Co., and the syndicate it represented re
 oeving s250oo,O0o in cash and their e.. | penses, services and risks. and $l29. .9gS. 7b | of stock of the corporation.
 | The Steel corporation acquired works
 the petition stated, with an annual ca
 pacity ranging from about 6D to s2 pc
 cent of the countrys production, with tn
 exception of pig iron, spiegel and ferro | which was 43.2 per cent