The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1915-06-04
Decision Given Against the
Government in District
Court in Trenton
NO VIOLATION OF
SHERMAN LAW FOUND
Real Test of Monopoly Is Not in Size
of That Which Is Acquired But in
the Trade Power of That Which Is
Not Acquired.

TRENTON, n. j., June 4.-That the
United States Steel corporation should
not be dissolved was the decision of
the United States District Court filed
here yesterday afternoon. The prin-
cipal points in the decision are:
1t refuses to issue any injunction.
It holds that foreign trade of the
Steel corporation is not a violation of
the Sherman law.
1t holds certain price-fxing agree
ments which followed the Gary dinner
but which stopped before the bill was
filed to have been unlawful.
1t allows the government to move to
retain jurisdiction of the bill if such
price fixing practices are renewed, but
suggests matters may now be con-
trolled by the new trade commission.
The opinions, two in number, are
largely discussion of whether the
steel corporation monopolized the steel
trade or dealt unfairly with com
petitors or purchasers.
The suit against the United States
Steel corporation was filed at Trenton
n. j.. Oct. %, 1911, during the Taft
administration and was started by
George w. 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 corpora
tions under different administrations
delved into the operations of the con-
Germ and q congressional committee,
headed by Representative A. o. Stanley
of Kentucky, investigated the alleged
trust. In preparing the case for action
the department of justice had the bene-
fit of all these Investigations.
The defendants named in the orig
inal bill of complaint were the Steel
corporation, its subsidiaries, and J. z.
Morgan (deceased), Charles Steele
George W Perkins, E. II. Gary, Charles
NJ. Sehwab, Andrew Carnegie, Henry
G. Frick, James Gayley, William IL
Moore, j. IL. Moore, Edmund c. Con
verse, Percival Roberts, jr., Daniel g.
Reid Norman B. Ream, John ID. Rock
efeller, John d. Rockefeller, jr., p. a
B. Widener and William P. Palmer,
past or present directors of the Steel
corporation, together with certain com
panies known as the James J. Hill in
terests and Louis w. Hill, James N.
Hill, Walter J. Hill, Edward T. Mich
trustees of the Hill companies.
In brief the general charge against
the defendants was that some of the
companies in themselves were combina-
tions in restraint of trade and that the
creation of the steel corporation, which
took in the steel and certain other
companies named in the suit, was IAN
attempt to monOpolize and a mOnopo-
lization' in violation of the Sherman
| antitrust law
The government s complaint stated
that the Federal Steel company, Car
negie company of New Jersey, Ameri
| can Steel & Wire company of New
Jersey, National Tube company, Ma
tional Steel company, American Tir
| Plate company, American Steel Hool
company, and American Sheet Stee
company, were each a combination OF
companies or concerns in restraint OF
| trade; that competition was largely
| eliminated in their respective lines
| that at the time the United States
| Steel corporation was formed the Car
| uegie, Federal, and National were IL
active competition with each other
/ that several of the companies were
| preparing to still further increase thei
! capacity to compete by establishing
themselves along new lines of manu-
| facture, and that for these reasons anC
for the general purpose of suppressin!
competition and controlling trade an,
commerce, the United States Steel cor
poration was formed by the director
named in the suit, all of whom, keep
the Rockefellers, had been variousl.
connected with one or more of the com
i panies.
The government further stated tina
the Steel corporation 5 capitalization
aggregated $1,402, SAG, S17; that thi
Capitalization was not less than 5000
OO0. 600 in excess of the value of tn
properties taken over; that its earning
were not commensurate with its actua
capital, nor were they entirely the lie
gitimate fruits of the earning capacit
of the properties acquired, separated
controlled, but were largely the resul