Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-03-02
STEEL COMPANY
NO TRUST, u. S.
COURT DECIDES
High Tribunal Rules COrpO-
ration Not Monopoly Under
the Sherman Law.
GOVERNMENT DEFEAT

WASHINGTON, March 2.-The United
States Steel corporation the worlds most
gigantic industrial concern, is not
trust within the meaning of the Sherman
law, the supreme court held yesterday.
The court also held that the corpora
ton need not dissolve.
Justice McKenna read the opinion Of
the court.
The vote of the court was four to
three. Chief Justice White, Justices Nc
Kenna, Holmes and Vandevanter were
in the majority. Justices Pitney, Day
and Clarke dissented. Justices McReyn-
olds and Brandeis took no part in the
decision.
The decision was defeat for the gov
eminent which brought suit several years
ago in which many of the biggest fig
ures In financial and industrial life Were
named.
New Jersey courts dismissed the gov
ernment's suit and supreme court yes
tcrday affirmed this action.
PROMINENT NAMES
BROUGHT INTO SUIT.
Among the names brought into the
suit were
Roosevelt, Hartman. J. p. Morgan,
ST. and Jr.: John D. Rockefeller, Sr.,
and Jr; Andrew Carnegie, Charles NJ.
Schwab, George W. Perkins, James J.
and Louis w. Hin and II. C. Frick.
Included also in the list Of defendants
weer the following corporations:
The United States Steel corporation.
the Carnegie Steel company, Federal
Steel company, American Steel Wire Com
pany, American Sheet and Tin Plate
pany. American Sheet and Tine Plate
company, American Tin Plate, company
American Bridge company. Lake Superior
D ~ IL. Ian
steel company, Clarion Steel company,
Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad com
pany and the Great Western Mining com
pany.
Corporations and individuals named de-
PENDANTS I'm the government suits We're
charged with constituting or causing an
Illegal combination to further a monop-
oily The alleged monopoly" started
nineteen years ago, when some OF the big
financial minds Of the country conceived
the idea OF forming gigantic steel
company TO eliminate individual control
to merge the principal steel companies
OF the country into the one great cor
porat ton. It was charged.
NINE COMPANIES
MERGED IN TWO YEARS.
Between 1898 and 1900 nine big com
pauies-principally the Carnegie com
pany, valued at $500. OOOD00-were merged.
Their stocks totaled $50 100000. Out OF
them WAS formed the United States Steel
corporation with capital stock Of
81, 100 OO0O 900. and bonds Of 1893, 900 900.
The American Bridge Company, with a
capital OF SEQ 900 co. was added shortly
afterward In 1901 the Bessemer steam
ship Company, owning fifty six Great
lakes vessels, WAS acquired. Merger
upon merger folowed--stcel companies
mines and ore leases. Included In the ore
properties were the Lake Superior Con
solldated Iron Mines. embracing the Mesa
barauge and the Great Western Mining
Company, whose lease since has been
cancelled.
In 1907 the transaction that caused
more trouble than any other was affected.
That was the transfer by the approval Of
then President Roosevelt OF the Tennes-
see Coal and Iron Company TO the steel
corporation. The acquisition was In DC
tober during the great panic Of 1907. The
government in its suit claimed f. II. Gary
and II. G. FTick consulted with Presi-
dent Roosevelt about buying the prop
erty, telling him II wan the only way to
prevent spread Of the panic and that he.
unacQaainted with the real facts, author
lied the purchase The deal. the govern
meat charged, was really in order to
take advantage Of the financial situation
10 acquire the property OF a competitor
Involved also In the litigation were the
noted Gary dinners that made history
several years ago. These affairs. az which
big business men gathered to talk In
dustrIal peace and combination, played a
big part in the millions Of words that
comprised the steel trust evidence and
argument.
The government In bringing the suit,
declared the steel trust enjoyed a monop-
oily Of many forms Of the steel industry,
principally in steel tubes and pipes and
heavy structural steel. In which some
other big companles-thc Bethlehem com
pany among them-do not compete.
Charges Of crushing competitors, infa-
ton 81 assets and price fixing all played
a part In the effort II the United States
TO dissolve not only the company but its
Individual Subsidiaries.
The case was aled Oct. 81 1911. aIleg-
ing "A combination In restraint Of inter
state commerce in iron and steel and an
attempt to monopolize the same.
This case was argued before the cir
cult judges during October, 1914. A de-
cslon adverse 10 the government was
handed down on June g. 1915, and a de-
cree Diminishing the petition was entered
Sept 10, 1918. From this decree an ap-
peal was taken to the supreme court
Argument was held before the supreme
court in. March 1917. and restored to
docket for reargument in 1917 and con
tinued from time TO time on account Of
war conditions.