New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1920-04-27
Dissolution of Concern
and Branches Dccreed
as Most of the Charges
Against 1t Are Upheld
Three Supreme
,Jurists Dissent
Decree of 1915, Refusing
to Sustain Accusation
of Monopoly, Reversed

WASHINGTON, April 26-Announc-
ing its decision in a part of the long
pending anthracite coal trust cases
to-day, the Supreme Court, in 4
to 3 opinion. sustained most of the
governments charges Of illegal COM
bnation against the Reading Company,
a Pennsylvania holding corporation, and
certain Of its railroad and coal subsidi-
aries. The court ordered their dissolu-
ton.
Chief Justice White and Associate
sented, while Justices McReynolds and
Brandeis took no part in the decision.
The majority opinion held the hold
ing company guilty of violation Of the
Sherman antitrust act, and reversed
Federal Court DEGREES rendered in
Philadelphia in 1915, refusing to sus-
tain the governments charges of mo-
nopoly, but directing the separation
of the Central Railroad Of New Jersey
from its subs idiary coal company, the
Lehigh and Wilkes Barre Coal Company.
Dissolution wa= ordered by the SUI
preme Court of the Reading Company,
the Philadelphia & Reading Railway
Company, the Philadelphia and Reading
Coal and iron Company; the Central
Railroad Of New Jersey and the Lehigh
and Wilkes Barre Coal Company, main
tained through tne holding corpora
ton, SO that they would be entirely
Independent Of each ether.
Disposition of the stock and bonds
OF the various companies held by the
Reading Company also was directed
Some DEGREES Sustained
The court, however, sustained lower
court DEGREES absolving the Lehigh Coal
and Navigation Company, the Lehigh e.
New England Railroad Company and
the Lehigh & Hudson River Railway
Company on charges as to restrictive
covenants in mining leases with respect
to the shipping of coal and refusing to
order the dissertation of the Phladel-
phia and Reading Coal and Iron Com
pany and the Lehigh and Wilkes Barre
Coal Company, maintained through the
holding company
Justice Clarke rendered the decision
Tor the majority, while Chief Justice
White in minority opinion, in which
Associate Justices Holmes and Van
Devanter joined, said the minority was
IN favor of accepting the opinion of the
lower court dismssing the govern
ment's suit
Justice McReynolds, who did not
participate in the decision, was Attor-
ney General during the time the gov
ernment prosecuted the suit, which was
instituted in 1913.
Directors Acquitted
Charges against the directors of the
holding company, including the late
George f. Baer and Henry c. Frick,
as we'll as George F. Baker, Henry A,
Du Pont, Daniel Willard Henry p. Nc
Kear and Samuel Dickson, who were
also named as defendants, were dis
missed.
"A majority of the individual de-
fendants,' the court said, "have died
since the suit was instituted, and their
successors in Office have not been made
parties, and since the conclusion to be
announced can be given full effec. oy
an appropriate decree against the cor
poration defendants the case as
against the remaining individual de-
PENDANTS need not be considered, ard
as to them the bill will be dismissed
witho ut prejudice"
Similar action was taken in regard
to the Wilmington & Northern Rail-
road Company. lnjunctions restrain
ing enforcement OF provisions inserted
by the Reading and Wilkesbarre coal
companies in coal leases requiring the
lessee to ship all coal mined by desig-
EClCO IAll AOOteS NSIc llduc pcIItIueUt,
the court condcmning such provisions
e. unlawful.
Justice Clarke in the majority opin-
ion charged that the Reading Com
pany, by an "adroit division of prop
erty and Of corporate agency" had
posely violated 'in a fragrant man
ner" the Sherman antitrust act and
suppressed commerce and competition.
The Reading also was declared to have
secured a dominating control" not
only over two great competing coal
interests, as we'll as two competing
interstate railroad carriers. but the
court said this dominating power was
CONTINUED on paeo twenty