Arizona republican., 1921-04-30
Federal Trade Compzsssicr Takes Action On Eong Standing Complaint Of Steel Product Users


 subsidiary companies. alleging un- fair competition in interstate com merce, was issued today by the fed eral trade commission. Thus the commission finally has decided that it has sufficient jurisdiction to take up the long standing complaints by various users of steel products and others against the alleged use by the corporation of the device known as the "Pittsburg plus price,"
 It was announced, however, that the commission had divided three to two Chairman Thompson and Com missioners Pollard and Nugent voting for issuance of the complaint, and Commissioners Gaskill and Murdock dissenting
 The Steel corporal and it's sub sidiaries are given thirty days to make formal anSw er to the complaint after which the case will proceed to trial on it's merits. The complaint was issued under the Clayton anti trust act and the law establishing the commission and the commissions s announcement said the case was an ''outgrowth of conditions complained of by more than 2,700 manufacturers of steel in the Chicago, Duluth and Birmingham districts, by legislatures of three states, by several municipal- ities and by chambers of commerce and many business organizations all throughout the United States"
 The Pittsburg plus price is de- scribed al length in the commis- sion's announcement which says Sat under it "all steel except rails, wherever made and whether made in the United States Steel corpora tions plants or by independents, is sold at the f. O. b. Pittsburg price. plus an amount equivalent to the freight to point of destination and as an illustration says that this means that the Gary steel fabricator who runs his own truck to the Gary. Ind, steel mill and purchases steel manufactured at that plant must pay the price charged in Pittsburg plus an amount equalling the freight rate from Pittsburg to Gary" The complaint is not limited. how ever, to the alleged use of thfs- de- vice. It charges specifically that the Steel corporation towns and con- trols the ultimate iron ore supply in the United States and that because of it's power and influence through the large percentage of the steel manufacturing business done by il and supported by it. its consequent potential power to embarrass or de- stroy it's competitors by unduly low ering it's price schedules is "tanta- mount to the naming by the Steel cor. poration of prices that are to be | charged by all the steel manufac. turers in the United States
 | Complaint also sets out that tn, steel corporation has capital stool outstanding of the par value O $S6S, 500, with a book value ex. cecding one and one-half billion dol lars, and that it has through its re spondent subsidiaries gross assets az gregatng considerably more thai two billion dollars.
 Taking up the "Pittsburg plus price in detail, the complaint say, that this price Is that which Pitts burg manufacturers must pay respon dents for rolled steel at Pittsburg an, that purchasers in other cities. excep
 Birmingham. Ala, must pay thi
 price plus the freight rate to the cit, of manufacture from Pittsburg, ire spective of where the steel is manu
 factured- The price at Birmingham
 Ala. the complaint says, is $5 a to-
 more than the Pittsburg price an
 that this is arbitrarily arrived at not withstaEding that steel is manufac
 tured at Birmingham at much les
 cost than at Pittsburg. It is allege
 in the complaint that the use of tn
 Pittsburg plus price enables Pitts
 burg steel manufacturers to secur substantially 50 per cent of the stex
 manufacturing business in the Unite
 States; that in order to retain sue
 percentage it retards as much as nee
 essary the natural steel manufactur ing growth of other sections of tn
 country; that the price enables tn steel manufacturers to maintain sub
 stantiaily uniform prices which the
 could net do otherwise, enables tn
 high cost steel manufacturing plan- at Pittsburg to maintain sufficient
 high prices for their product to opel
 ate at a profit without having the
 business jeopardized by the lowe
 cost of steel manufacturers in othe i sections: enables the lower cost ste. 7 manufacturing plants outside E Pittsburg to secure not only tf profit which the high cost Pittsbur . steel manufacturing plants secur but un1Gly large additional profit because they manufacture at a muc lower cost and Pittsburg plus prit enables tho steel manufacturers ou side of Pittsburg to increase the profits each time the railroad tran: portation charges On steel are il ,, | creased.
 The subsidiaries of the steel col poration named in the complaint al the American Bridge company, u American Sheet and Tin Plate con pany. the Carnegie Steel compan f the National Tube company and u
 American Steel and Wire compan 2 New Jersey corporations: the Illino
 Steel corporation. the Minnesota Ste 2 company, the Tennessee Coal al
 Iron company and the Claireton Ste company, the Union Steel compar if and he Lorain Steel company, Penl n sylvan:a corporations.
 n The complaints against the ste Id corporation have been before Il = commission for several years. and 10 decision as to whether the commi
 sion had jurisdiction was delay
 pending hearings and discussions
 members of the body. At prelim
 nary hearing here or July 3, 19l -i Judge F.. H. Gary. chairman of t fe corpora ticn, strongly urged the cor h mission to go into the questio Y. Judge Gary was asked if he thoug l. the committee had Jurisdiction. W You ought to have jurisdicti d
 (Conunued on Page Two),