The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1915-06-04
FEDERAL SUIT E
WON BY Steel
CORPORATION
Decision Handed Down BY the
United States Supreme Court
This Afternoon.
PENDING IN COURTS
FOR THREE YEARS
Begun In Taft Administration
By Attorney General Wicker.
sham; Evidence Voluminous.

BY Attorney General Wicker
sham; Evidence Voluminous.
<BY ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON, June s. The
United States Steel corporation wor
a sweeping victory in the federal suit
for its dissolution, which was decided
by the United States Supreme court
in it's favor this afternoon.
The suit against the United States
Steel corporation was filed at Tren.
ton, N. j., October &c, 1911, during the
Taft administration and was started
by George w. Wickersham who was
attorney general at the time. Prior
to the fling Of the action, the corpor.
alton had teen under investigation
several times. The federal bureau of
corporations under different admin
istrations delved into the operations Of
The corcern End q congressional CON-
;nittee headed by Representative A.
Q. Stanley, Of Kentucky, investigated
the alleged trust. In preparing the
case for action the department Of JUS
tice had the benefit of all these in
vestig1tions.
The testimony, exhibits, briefs and
written and oral arguments were ex-
ceedingly voluminous. The examiner
in the case sat 166 days in nine dif-
ferent cities and heard 400 witnesses.
The testimony made up 56 volumes
containing $1,000 printed pages. There
were more than 1850 pages of printed
arguments aside from the voluminous
answers filed by the many defendants,
and the oral arguments filled more
than 1900 typewriter pages.
The defendants named and the orig
inal bill of complaint were the Steel
corporation, its subsidiaries, and j.
P. Morgan (deceased), Charles Steele,
George w. Perkins, E. H. Gary, Chas.
NJ. Schwab, Andrew Carnegie, Henry
G. Frick, James Gayley, William H.
Moore, J. n. Moore, Edmund e. Con-
verge, Percival Roberts, Jr., Daniel G..
Reid, Norman B. Reani, John D. Rock
efeller, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., P. A.
B. Widener and William p. Palmer,
past or present directors of the Steel
together with certain
companies, known as the James ].
Hill interests, and Louis w. Hill, Jas.
N. Hill, Walter J. Hill, Edward T.
Nichols, J. H. Gruber, who were sued
as trustees of the Hill companies.
In brief the general charge against
the defendants was that some of the
companies in themselves were COM
bined 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
in violation of the
Sherman antitrust law.
The Hill ore companies were in
volved in the suit by reason of the
fact that the Steel corporation leased
the ore deposits held by the ore COM
panies, the government alleging that
this lease gave the corporation a mon
opoly of the ore supply of the United
States. This lease was cancelled after
the suit was filed.
The governments complaint stated
that the Federal Steel company, Car
negie company of New Jersey, Amer
lean Steel & Wire company of New
Jersey, National Steel Hoop company,
and American Sheet Steel company
were each a combination of compan-
les or concerns in restraint of trade;
that competition was largely elimin-
ated in their respective lines; that at
the time the United States Steel cor
poration was formed the Carnegie,
Federal and National were in active
competition with each other; that sew
eral of the companies were preparing
to still further increase their capacity
to compete by establishing themselves
along new lines of manufacture and
that for these reasons and for the gen.
eral purpose of suppressing competi-
tion and controlling trade and COM
merce the United tSates Steel corpor-
alton was formed by the directors
named in the suit, all Of whom except
the Rockefellers had been variously
connected with one or more Of the
The government further stated that
the Steel corporations capitalization
81, ,402, ,846,817; that this
was not less than $780,
000, 900 in excess of the value Of the
taken over; that its earn
ings were not commensurate with its
actual capital, nor were they entirely
the legitimate fruits of the earning
of the properties acquired,
controlled, but were largely
the result Of power exerted over trade
by such vast combination.
1t was further charged by the gov
ernment that many millions Of dollars
were issued for mere promotion and
underwriting, the petition stating that
Morgan & Co. and the syndicate it
receiving $25,000,0 900 in
cash and their expenses, services, and
risks, and $$129, ,998, ,768 of stock of
the corporation. .,..,..
The Steel corporation acquired
works, the petition stated, with an an
nual capacity ranging from about 60
to 80 per cent of the, country's pro-
duction, with the exception of pig
iron, spiegel and ferro which was 1872
per cent - &>
The petition also charged that sub
to the formation Of the cor
poration numerous companies were
absorbed to suppress competition in
cluding the Tennessee Coal, Iron and
Railroad company; which was acquired
during the money panic OF 1897. !