IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, vs. UNITED STATES STEEL OO~PORATION AND OTHERS. PETITION. JOHN B. VREELAND, District Attorney of the United States for the District of New Jersey. GEORGE W. WICKERSHAM, Attorney-General of the United States. J. M. DICKINSON, Special Assistant to the Attorney­ General of the United States. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, vs. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION AND OTHERS. To the Judges of the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey: THE UNITED STATES oFAMERIOA, by JoHN B. VREELAND, Attor­ ney for the District of New Jersey, acting under the direction of the Attorney-General of the United States; brings thi.s proceeding in equity against United States Steel Corporation, Carnegie Steel Company, Carnegie Company of New Jersey, Federal Steel Com­ pany, Nati on al Steel Company, American Steel and Wire Com­ pany of New Jersey, National Tube Company, Shelby Steel Tube Company, American Tin Plate Company, American Sheet and Tin Plate Company, American Sheet Steel Company, Ameri­ can Steel Hoop Company, American Bridge Company, Lake Superior Consolidated Iron Mines, Union Steel Company, H. C. }Prick Coke Company,) Clairton Steel Company, Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Corr~pany, Great Western Mining Company, West Missabe Land Company, Limited, vVright Land Company, Limited, Davis Land Company, Limited, Wells Land Com­ pany, Limited, Stone Land Company, Limited, Wabigon Iron Company, Minosin Iron Company, Nibiwa Iron Company, ·wenona Iron Company, Minawa Iron Company, Leonard Iron Mining Company, Arthur Iron Mining Company, Fillmore Iron Mining Company, Harrison Iron. Mining Company, Jackson Iron Mining Company, Polk Iron Mining Company, Tyler Iron Mining Company, Van Buren Iron Mining Company, Louis vV. Hill, James N. Hill, Walter J. Hill, Edward T. Nichols, J. H. Gruber, said named individuals being sued as Trustees, J. P. Morgan, 2 3 Charles Steele, George vV. Perkins, E. H. Gary, Chas. M. Schwab, II. Andrew Carnegie, Henry 0. Frick, James Gayley, "William H. Moore, J. H. Moore, Edmund C. Converse, Percival Roberts, Jr., CONSOLIDATIONS 1898-1900. Daniel G. Reid, Norman B. Ream, John D. Rockefeller, John D. FEDER.A.I, STEEL COMPANY. Rockefeller, Jr., P.A. B. Widener, and William P. Palmer. The following of said defendants are corporations organized In September, 1898, the Federal Steel Company was incor­ under the laws of the State of New Jersey and are residents of the porated under the laws of the State of New Jersey. It was a State ofNew Jersey, to wit: security-holding company. It issued a capital stock of approxi­ United States Steel Corporation, Carnegie Steel Company, Car­ mately $100,000,000, which exceeded, by many millions, not less negie Company of New Jersey, Federal Steel Company, National than twenty, the value of the properties obtained. It acquired Steel Company, American Steel & Wire Company of New Jersey, the entire capital stock of the Illinois Steel Company; the Lorain National Tube Company, Shelby Steel Tube Company, American Steel Company, of Ohio; the Johnson Company, of Pennsylvania; Tin Plate Company, American Sheet and Tin Plate Company, the Minnesota Iron Company, one of the largest ore concerns in American Sheet Steel Company, American Steel Hoop Company, the Lake Superior regions (which owned an important ore rail­ American Bridge Company, Lake Superior Consolidated Iron road and a fleet of ore vessels), and the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Mines. Railway Company. By this step there was brought under one control approximately fifteen per cent of the steel ingot produc­ tion of the country. The Minnesota Iron Company owned or On information and belief your petitioner alleges and shows: leased about 40,000 acres of mineral lands in Minnesota and con­ trolled the Duluth & Iron Range Railroad, the Minnesota Steam­ I. ship Company and the Minnesota Dock Company. 'l'he said railroad extended from Duluth into the iron-ore district owned CONDITIONS BEFORE THE CONSOLIDATIONS OF by the Minnesota Iron Company in Minnesota. The Minnesota 1898-1900. Iii Steamship Company owned a fleet of nine steel steamships and seven steel barges, operating on the Great Lakes. Previous to and until the year 1898 the bulk of the iron and The Illinois Steel Coll'.i.pany owned large works at North and steel business of the United States among the several States and South Chicago, also at Chicago, at Joliet, Ill., and at Milwaukee, between the several States and foreign countries, was carried on Wis. It also owned all the stocks and bonds of the Chicago, by many different persons, partnerships or corporations, which Lake Shore & Eastern Railway Company, the Chicago & Kenosha were in active and general competition with each other, except at Railway Company, Chicago & South Eastern Railway Company, various times and in various localities, where such trade was re­ the Joliet and Blue Island Railway Company, and the Milwau­ strained by them by unlawful pools and combinations. kee, Bay View & Chicago Railroad Company. It also owned the Iri 1898, there began a rapid and radical revolution in the entire capital stock of the Southwest Connellsville Coke Com­ steel and iron business, characterized by great consolidations, re­ pany and the Cundy Iron Company, of Michigan, and owned or sulting in bringing, by the year 1900, a very large· proportion of leased about 7,000 acres of ore and mineral larids in Michigan. important branches of those industries, such as crude and semi­ The Elgin, Joliet & Eastern rail way extended from vVauke­ finished steel, rails, structural steel, plates, merchant bars, wire gan, Ill., around Chicago to Porter, Ind., and connected with rods and wire products, ·sheets, tin plate, and tubes, under the every railroad entering Chicago. It had branches to Aurora control of consolidated concerns, each comprising many who for­ and vVhiting, Ind., and South Chicago, Ill., where it owned ex­ merly had been competitors. Such consolidations affecting the tensive wharfs and other terminal property. defendants to this petition were as follows: The property of the Lorain Steel Company, of Ohio, consisted 4 5 'of a large steel plant at Lorain, Ohio, with 525 acres of land on such consolidation and absorption were a combination in re­ the Black River. straint of trade and commerce among the several States and with The Johnson Company of Pennsylvania owned a manufactur­ foreign nations, and an attempt to monopolize and a monopolizci,­ ing plant and 150 acres of land at Johnstown, Pa. tion of, a part of the trade and commerce among the several States The Illinois Company and the Lorain Company, above re­ and with foreign nations within the meaning of the Anti-trust Act. ferred to, were, previous to said combination, competitors. At the time of its acquirement by the principal defendant, the In addition, the Federal Steel Company owned the entire the United States Steel Corporation, as hereinafter shown, it capital stock of the Lake Terminal Railroad Company and the owned or controlled the following companies and their proper­ Johnstown & Stony Creek Railroad Company, which owned re­ ties: spectively the terminal roads connecting the steel works at Lorain Carnegie Steel Company of Pennsylvania, owning Edgar Ohio, and Johnstown, Pa. It owned also the entire capital stock Thomson Works, Bessemer, Pa.; Duquesne Works, Duquesne, of the Ingleside Coal Company. Pa.; Homestead vVorks, Munhall, Pa.; Upper and Lower Union .The underwriting syndicate of the Federal Steel Company re­ Mills, Pittsburg, Pa.; Carrie Blast Furnaces, Rankin, Pa. ; Lucy ceived approximately $5,680,000 preferred stock and $8,400,000 Blast Furnaces, Pittsburg, Pa., and Howard Axle Works, Howard, of common stock for approximately $4,800,000 in cash, and their Pa. services in organizing the concern. Forty-three and six-tenths per cent of Pennsylvania & Lake The purpose and the effect of such consolidation were a com­ Erie Dock Co. bination between said consolidated companies and the Federal Twenty-five per cent of New York, Pennsylvania & Ohio Steel Company, their officers, agents, promoters and underwriters, Dock Company. in restraint of trade and commerce among the several States and Carnegie Land Company and Conneaut Land Company. with foreign nations, within the meaning of Section 1, and were Eighty-three and one-third per cent of Oliver Iron Mining an attempt by the said parties to monopolize and a monopoliza­ Company, owning or leasing a large number of active and in­ tion of part of the trade or commerce among the several States active iron ore properties on the Michigan and Mesabi Ranges, and with foreign nations, within the meaning of Section 2 of the which were acquired from various independent mmmg compa­ Anti-trust Act. ' nies. The control of all of the said companies, with their properties, Fifty per cent of Pewabic Company. was acquired by the United States Steel Corporation by the con­ Fifty-two per cent of Pittsburg, Bessemer & Lake Erie Rail­ solidation as hereinafter described. road Company. Union Railroad Company. CARNEGIE $0MPANY (OF NEW JERSEY.) Eighty-three and one-third per cent of Pittsburg Steamship Company. The Carnegie Company (of New Jersey) was incorporated by Seventy-five per cent of Pittsburg Limestone Company, L't'd. the State of New Jersey in March, 1900, with a capitalization of $320,000,000, half in stock and half in bonds. Pittsburg & Conneaut Dock Company; Carnegie Natural Gas Company; Youghiogheny Northern Railway Company; Mount . It took over the Carnegie Steel Company (Lt'd), and an affiil­ Pleasant Water Company; Trotter Water Company; Mingo Coal hated company, the H. C. Frick Coke Company, with all of their Company; Union Supply Company, and H. C. Frick Coke Com­ subsdiary compani13s. At the time of its formation it controlled pany; the latter holding by direct ownership, or through subsi­ fully eighteen per cent of the steel ingot production of the country.