New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-06-04
j. s. STEEL NOT A
TRUST, SAYS COURT

history OF the big corporation, was
made in fair business course and was
"thc honest excrtion OF ones right 70
contract for ones benefit, unaccom-
panied by wrongful motive to injure
others"
Court Exonerates Carnegie.
With regard TO Andrew Carnegie,
who. the government charged, was a
party to the unlawful combination"
tiOn with all the inhrmities attaching
to such participation" the court found
that there i no proof that he accepted
any other relation in the formation of
the Steel Corporation than that of
seller of his stocks and bonds. The
court also declared to be true MIR.
Carnegies statement that he disposed
of his interests in desire to retire
from the hazards and responsibility
of active business.
/. Four judges, Burlington, Mcpherson,
Hunt and Woolley, sat in this case.
, While the suit was filed in the Dis
trict Court, II was heard on a writ Of
expedition by the judges of the Third
Judicial Circuit, who form the Court
Of Appeals. The next step in the case
Will be the filing of d formal decree,
and the government will probably then
take an appeal 10 the Supreme Court
Judge Burlington wrote the principal
opinion and Judge WoOlley wrote q
coucurrinG opinion, in which Judge
Hunt concurred. The court stated tina,
"all the members of the court are IN
agreement as to the decree that vii
be entered. although they are not II
complete accord concerning every steI
by which that result Is reached"
In his opinion Judge Burlington GOV
ers $50 pages. II was filed here anC
abstracts were given out IN Trenton
and IN the United States court az Phil
adclphia. where the case was heard.
Taft Forces Started Suit
The suit was instituted by the Taf
administration. and was prosecuted fol
the government by Jacob ". Dickinson
former Secretary of War, as chic.
counsel.
The opinion Of Judge Burlington
apart from brief summary Of the law
. al it's beginning. is discussion OF The
business Of the Steel Corporation GOV
ering the ten years Of its existence NJ
90 the time the suit was filed, the
ACQUISITION Of its home and foreign
trade and the proofs as ~ whether IT
has restrained or suppressed compet-
ton or been guilty Of acts TO warrant
Us dissolution.
While discussing the law Judge Buf-
fngton says the construction OF the
/ sherman law was settled by the Su-
prcme Court in the Standard oil and
Tobacco cases.
II is shown by the opinion that in
determining what are the unlawful re-
straints and monopolies against which
the Sherman act protects trade the
Supreme Court summarized all It's trust
q decisions by stating in late case that
/ these cases may be taken 10 have
established that only such combina-
/ lions are within the act as by reason
+ OF intent or the inherent nature Of the
/ contemplated acts prejudice the public
| interests by unduly restricting compe-
/ tition or unduly obstructing the course
Of trade"
Taking this as the test OF illcgality,
the opinion Of the court handed down
to-day states: Applying the foregoing
definitions Of the Supreme Court to the
I case i'm hand the basic question for US
20 determine Is one Of fact namely,
whether the union Of several defendant
companies in the United States Steel
/ CORPORATION prciudices the public in
terests by unduly restricting competi-