Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1916-11-08
N At ACK|NG
COAL TRUST, j. s.
SUED READING
h District Court, july 1915,
the Government Lost All but
One of Principal Conten-
lions,

bennington. Nov. In the attack
.,ou The so.called Hard Coal trust
~. opO goverpuelt in 1913 sued the
geading company, a PennsylVlh'l
holding corporation, and affiliated
,a,rad and coal companies, ASKING
gssolntion of an alleged monopoly III
rostraint of trade in the anthracite IN
5netry having combined assets OF
more than $500, 100000.
Two lines Of attack were taken by
tho government. Under the sherman
antitrust law it sought dissolution OF
vorious forms of the alleged comb4n-
Alton. Il charged violation OF the
commodities clause Of the interstate
commerce act, in the transportation
H. fbe Philadelphia & Reading rail-
road and the Central railroad of New
Jersey both owned by the holding
corporation, of coal mined by respec-
tive subsidiary companies.
In the decision by the district court
IN Philadelphia July 3, 1918, from
which the present appeal was taken
10th by the government ana the
Reading interests, the government lost
All but one Of its principal conten-
lions Judges Mcpherson Buffing-
ion and Hunt. who also decided the
steel trust case against the government
did net sustain the charges Of mo-
nopoy against the Reading company,
Iut directed separation of the Cen
trail Of New Jersey from its subsidiary
coal company, the Lehigh & Wilesbar-
ss.a1 ..,gr ION q Ysfaf
Central OF New Jersey from the Read
ing company was refused.
Asks Decree for Dissolution.
Upon appeal, the government asked
for a general form of decree for dis
solution of the whole alleged Illegal
combine to be presented by the de-
PENDANTS. These principal points
were asked for in a decree:
Declaring the Reading (holding)
company combination i'm restraint Of
trade and ordering redistribution OF
stock It owns of the Philadelphia u
Reading railroad and the Philadelphia
Reading coal q Iron company, ana
also with separation of the two latter
companies
Of New Jersey from the Reading com
blne by redistribution of the 81 per
cent OF the New Jersey company held
by the Reading holding corporation.
Enforcing observance of the com
modties clause by separation, in stock
ownership, Of the Reading railroad
rom the coal company, and also or
me Central Of New Jersey from the
Lehigh & Wilkesbarre Coal COMPANY,
d which the Central owns niue-tenths
Of the stock.
For a Secondary Combine.
dissolution of what the government
termed a secondary combine also ask
el was for in modification and can
,eIlatlon of contracts and leases be
,|een the Central of New Jersey and
yne Lehigh Coal & Navigation Co,
separate corporation which provide
.or Shipment of thTee-fourths of It's
Oulput over the railroad lines, and
PAYMENT of the railroad for the Lease
VI ihe Lehigh & SusquehanhI ran
.vdu lines Of one-third of gross re-
.slp'S or the latter's property. The
asoyeIhment did not press charges that
le central New Jerseys lease of the
''I,er road was a restraint of trade.
separation of the Reading railroad
-"u coal companies, it was declared,
nugld OF itself result in compliance
''" .he commodities clause act.
a., uecree in general terms to in
o muue each of the complex alleged
,,ouIDthauons was asked by the gov
t ,Ihnleht specially urging that redis-
luton OF stock among present
ttsso ~, would not accomplish
o ,ne ulssolutions desired to restore
HlOa.gpetltlon in anthracite ownership,
"SStucIlon, sales and transportation.
M Tuungest Monopoly in Industry.
s,lis Nae headlng company, through con-
p'.uSalloh and reorganization of the
ZOO Jug railroad and coal interests IN
to0, ny the creation of the holding
IN 9' uppaiiy and its subsequent purchase.
H. oVl of majority of stock of the
geu'Ial railroad Of New Jersey. which
cons cons me Lehlsh & Wilkesbarre Coal
TLIlpSny and has contracts with the
H. sh coal q Navigation company,
gtro government alleged, was the
antl .sesl and largest monopoly in the
tbst Iy'le industry. 1t was ALLEGED
a lHe Reading interests controlled
s6tb per cent of the known supply Of
AZ aI, 0ciIe and transported one-third
ter. tonnage. This the Reading in
CEN denied, asserting but 20 per
penn.oi the coal fields, in eastern
braf'. SylVama were controlled and that
ton. oilIy 10 - cents q
,.i Beside the Reading holding corpor-
as,I,t lhe detenigL;a wer. The Phil
rsn, p'' IL, & Reaching Railway com
Lor u Fahacelphia < Reading Coal x
Ia ~, 20, Central Cailroad CO. Of New
ro| lehigh 4 Wilkesbarre Coal
~ Net'Sh Coal & Navigation Co;