The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1920-03-19
u. S. STEEL IS
NOT A TRUST
Supreme Court Dismisses Action,
Holding Corporation Was Not
Illegally Organized.
ENDS NINE YEAR BATTLE.
Sees Great Risk in Industrial World if
Company Is DissoIved-Day, Pit
ney and Clarke Hold Cor
poration Violates Law.

Washington.-In one of the most
important opinions ever handed down
by that body the United States Su-
preme Court held that the United
States Steel Corporation is not trust
within the meaning of the Sherman
antitrust law.
The decision, opposite in effect to
those of the court in the Standard Oil
and American Tobacco Company cases.
was concurred in by only four of the
nine members of the court. Three dis
sented and two took no part in the
consideration of the case or the deci-
sion.
The opinion was read by Justice Nc
kenna and was concurred in by Chief
Justice White and Justices Holmes
and Vandevanter. Justice Day read
the dissenting opinion, in which he
was Joined by Justices Clarke and Pit
ney. Justices McReynolds and Bran
deis did not have any part in the case.
The majority opinion held, in effect,
that the Steel Corporation had COM
nitted no overt acts violative of the
Sherman law since the governments
suit was filed; that, although by its
size and it's control of equipment and
resources in the steel business the cor
poration was in position to dominate
the trade, the mere fact that it was
able to do so should not be taken as
indicating that it did in the absence
Of any evidence, and, finally, that to
order the dissolution of the corpora
ton would involve the risk of great
disturbance in the financial, CONNER
cial and economic structure and thus
would menace the public interest,
which in this case the court held to be
of paramount importance.
In vigorous dissenting opinion JUS
tice Day said that he could find no rea-
son for the courts failure to apply in
this case the same policy as was fol-
lowed with respect to the Standard Oil
and American Tobacco Company cases.
The failure to follow that rule, he said,
constituted an annulment of the Sher-
man act, making necessary some ac-
ton by Congress indicating anew just
what limitations were to be put upon
trade combinations.
Justice Day said that he knew of no
public interest that sanctioned the VIC
lation of law and no disturbance OF
foreign or domestic commerce that
would Justify the abrogation of stat
| uteS.
The dissenting opinion concerning
the notification of the Sherman law
by reason of the alleged setting aside
in this case of the precedents of the
Standard Oil and Tobacco cases
caused a great stir. The majority
opinion justifies this setting aside of
the heretofore usual rule in cases I'M
der the Sherman act on the ground
that in this case there was no proof,
as in the other two, that the corpora
ton had from its inception been law
breaker.
That the decision of the Supreme
Court in the Steel Corporation litiga-
ton may have a farreaching effect
upon other antitrust cases now pend
ing or which may have been contem-
plated was the belief expressed by
more than one official Attorney Gen
eral Palmer and G. B. Ames, his as
sistant in charge of the antitrust
cases, withheld comment, but it was
admitted that many vital points of law
involved in other cases pending were
dealt with in the courts findings.
Mr.. Ames at once began a study of
the decision and the minority report of
the court and will make a statement
to the attorney general. In the mean
time the status of other litigation must
remain in doubt. The fact that the
decision in favor of the Steel Corpora
ton was rendered by minority of the
whole court may have some effect
upon the program of the department
of justice.