^$&W 
 
 Messrs. JOHN Q. LANE, 
 
 AND 
 
 
 i 
 
 SILAS W. PETT1T, 
 
 mOWINGt IRE ILLEGALITY AND 
 i PJMINAI CuXsPIEA CY 
 
 -oF THE- 
 
 ANTHRACITE COAL I 
 
 MONOPOLY, 
 
 BEFORE THE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATURE, 
 
 JULY 28th— Slst 18: 
 
 \ 
 
 PHILADELPHIA: 
 A. T. ZEISING A CO.. PES., s. j; COR, FOURTH 
 
 1875. 
 
 IB CIIE-^XUT STREETS, 
 
 £5M 
 
 jt£»*]
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF ILLINOIS 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 EGO?
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 JOHN Q. LANE, Esq.. 
 
 OF PHILADELPHIA, 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 Joint Committee of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, ap- 
 pointed to inquire into the affairs oj the Philadelphia 
 and Heading Coal and Iron Company and the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Pail road Com- 
 pany, on July 28th, 1875, 
 
 IN OPPOSITION TO THE 
 
 ANTHRACITE COAL MONOPOLY. 
 
 SPECIALLY REPORTED BY 
 
 JOSEPH I. GILBERT.
 
 

 
 33?, X 
 
 c 
 0° 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen op the Committee: — When 
 the learned counsel for the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron 
 Company, and the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, opened 
 the case of the defence, he intimated that the charges against those 
 companies of illegality and unconstitutionality had been abandoned. I 
 2 have no doubt, gentlemen, that as you had heard all the testimony 
 5 submitted by us you were surprised, and we frankly admit that we were 
 astonished at this intimation. So far from withdrawing any of the 
 charges made against these two companies in the joint resolution of 
 the Legislature of Pennsylvania, we are here to reiterate the charges 
 
 J a nd, T think, to convince you, gentlemen, that these two companies 
 have not only been mining and selling coal without any lawful authority 
 -y but, further, that, if they did have lawful authority to mine and sell, 
 ~~~ they have been exercising it in a way that is not only unlawful 
 but criminal. 
 
 To come to the question of a WANT OF LAWFUL POWER to do 
 
 / what they have been doing, it will be necessary for us first to ascertain 
 
 ^ what power it is that they do possess and, after that, to see whether 
 
 ^ they are exercising or attempting to exercise any power not given to 
 
 J them by the law, by their charter, or by necessary implication. For the 
 purposes of this investigation, it will not be necessary for us to go into 
 any critical analysis of the powers of the Philadelphia and Reading 
 _ Railroad Company. That corporation we know to be a common 
 ~- carrier and neither in its charter, the supplements thereto, nor the 
 ^ general laws of the commonwealth is the power anywhere given to the 
 _2 railroad company to mine or sell coal. All the power for that purpose 
 that this railroad company is assumed to possess is contained in a pro- 
 i vision in the charter of the Coal and Iron Company. I repeat that 
 you may search it all through and nowhere will you find in the 
 charter of the railroad company any power whatever to own coal lands 
 or to mine or sell coal: the company is simply a common carrier with 
 v authority to own only such real estate as may be necessary for its 
 laisiness as a common carrier. The charter of the Coal and Iron 
 C Company, however, contains this clause, "and for any railroad or 
 L/ mining company existing under the laws of this state to subscribe for 
 -^ or purchase the stock or to purchase or guarantee the bonds of the 
 company hereby incorporated." 
 
 373445
 
 4 
 
 It is these few words that empower the railroad company, if indeed 
 it has the power at all, to do all the mischief of which we complain. 
 Aside from these few words, take them out of the charter, and the 
 railroad would not pretend to have any power such as is here claimed. 
 We come therefore at once to an investigation of this charter of the 
 Coal and Iron Company. It is entitled "An act to incorporate the 
 Laurel Run Improvement Company." I ask you, gentlemen, to 
 observe that there is but one subject in the title of this charter ; that 
 which I have just read being the entire title. The act goes on and 
 provides, as is customary in all such charters, for the incorporation of 
 this company and, in the third section, enumerates the powers given to 
 the company: " The said corporation shall have power to purchase, sell, 
 transport and mine coal and to mine and manufacture iron, and for 
 this purpose the said company shall have power to acquire from time 
 to time by purchase, lease or otherwise, such lands as they may deem 
 expedient, and may lease, sell, mortgage or otherwise dispose of such 
 lands or any rights, easements or privileges therein, and may con- 
 struct all necessary buildings and fixtures necessary for the business of 
 mining and for preparing coal for market, mining and manufacturing 
 iron and the accommodation of persons engaged in their employment 
 in the said business." 
 
 Further on, it provides: "And it shall be lawful for the President 
 and Directors of said company to subscribe for and purchase the lands 
 or stock of any other incorporated company in the state of Pennsylvania." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, as we understand the English language and as we 
 understand the law, what I have read to you constitutes one subject. 
 It incorporates a company and it gives to this company certain powers 
 and certain privileges — sufficiently numerous, most assuredly. Then 
 follows this clause : " and for any railroad or mining company existing 
 under the laws of this state to subscribe for or purchase the stock, or 
 to purchase or guarantee the bonds of the company hereby incorporated." 
 
 We say that this is another and a distinct subject, as compared with 
 the one already contained in the Act. One of the subjects provides 
 for the incorporation of a company and for giving to it the powers 
 that the law intends it shall have : the other subject provides with 
 ecpial distinctness for the increasing or extending of the powers or 
 franchise of all the other corporations in Pennsylvania. Without this 
 provision, these corporations had no such power : there is no statute 
 providing that they shall have such power. On the contrary, the
 
 prior Act of April 15th, 1869, provides that the power given in that 
 act to corporations to guarantee the bonds and purchase the stock of 
 mining companies shall not extend to Schuylkill County. Therefore 
 I say to you, gentlemen, that in VIOLATION OF THE ACT OF 
 ASSEMBLY of 1869, this company has been mining coal in Schuyl- 
 kill County and selling it all over the country. 
 
 Previous to 1864, as is known to those of you, gentlemen, who have 
 occupied seats in the Legislature of Pennsylvania for many years, the 
 custom of passing what were known as " omnibus bills " or bills con- 
 taining a variety of subjects not expressed in the titles prevailed to an 
 alarming extent. In 1864, the following amendment to the Constitu- 
 tion was adopted : 
 
 " No bill shall be passed by the legislature containing more than 
 one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in the title, except appro- 
 priation bills." 
 
 If, therefore, the incorporation of the Laurel Run Improvement 
 Company and the granting to it such powers as are necessary is a sub- 
 ject distinct from that of the extending and increasing of the powers 
 of every other corporation under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 
 it must appear to you, as it does to us clearly, that as this charter con- 
 tains two subjects, it was passed in direct VIOLATION OF THE 
 CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION. The omission of one of these 
 subjects from the title renders the charter still more repugnant to the 
 Constitutional requirement adopted in 1864. Assuming this law to be 
 unconstitutional and consequently void and liable to be set aside at 
 any time, it follows that the Reading Railroad Company, mining and 
 selling coal upon the authority alleged to be derived from that charter, 
 has been acting not only without warrant of law but in direct viola- 
 tion of law. The Act of April 6, 1833, provides : 
 
 "Whereas, it is contrary to the laws and policy of the state, for 
 any corporation to prevent or impede the circulation of landed property 
 from man to man, without a license from the commonwealth, and no 
 corporation either of this state or of any other state, though lawfully 
 incorporated or constituted, can in any case purchase lands within this 
 state, either in its corporate name, or names of any person or persons 
 whomsoever for its use, directly or indirectly, without incurring the 
 forfeiture of said lands to this commonwealth, unless said purchase be 
 sanctioned and authorized by an act of the legislature thereof, but 
 every such corporation, its feoffee or feoffees, hold and retain the
 
 same, subject to be divested or dispossessed at any time by the 
 commonwealth, according to due course of law." 
 
 It is admitted and will not be contradicted that the coal and iron 
 company is an auxiliary of the railroad company. All its stock is 
 owned and its bonds guaranteed by the railroad company. The charter 
 was obtained for the railroad company, and the two companies are in 
 every respect identical and the same thing. 
 
 Now, if we are right in our conclusions there may be a race between 
 the legislature and the Auditor General or his deputy escheator, for 
 the act provides further that if any corporation shall hold lands in 
 violation of this act, the same shall escheat to the commonwealth ; 
 though it is true the legislature has the power to remit the forfeiture. 
 
 We say, therefore, that this railroad and coal and iron company, in 
 this business of mining and selling coal, HAVE BEEN ACTING 
 WITHOUT LEGAL AUTHORITY. But if it be assumed that this 
 is a valid charter and that they do have authority, we then say we have 
 proven to you that they have been transacting their business in a way 
 which is not only a misuse and an abuse of their charter, but in a 
 way that the law pronounces a conspiracy and a crime. At the com- 
 mencement of this investigation, we called witnesses to show the full 
 extent of the anthracite coal field known as the northern, the central 
 and the southern coal basins. The whole matter is condensed in the 
 statistics published by state authority, and from these I quote : 
 
 The total extent of all the anthracite coal in Pennsylvania, in the 
 United States and probably in the world, is encompassed within 472 
 square miles. 
 
 The author says : " It is sometimes difficult to make people believe 
 that all the anthracite or common hard coal of America, which is used 
 everywhere, of which more than nineteen millions of tons are annually 
 mined and which is sent for use almost all over the western world 
 really comes from this one small locality in Eastern Pennsylvania. If 
 these regions were all brought together into one body, they would only 
 form a small country twenty miles wide and a little less than twenty- 
 four miles long." 
 
 We have thus established by the evidence, gentlemen, that all the 
 coal of this kind in the commonwealth and in the United States, is 
 comprised within these three or four basins : some of the witnesses 
 speaking of four, some of three. We went further and established the 
 fact, that the only avenues to market for this coal were by way of the
 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, the Lehigh Valley Railroad, the 
 New Jersey Central Railroad, the Delaware and Hudson Canal, the 
 Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad, and the Pennsylvania 
 Coal Company. Some of these are mining companies which control 
 transportation companies. We have also the admission — though it is 
 a fact that you all know by observation — that the only avenue to 
 market lor the coal mined in what is known as the Schuylkill region is 
 over the Reading Railroad or lines controlled by the Reading Railroad 
 Company. We went further and showed you, by the testimony and 
 by the admitted agreement, that with the exception of a small portion 
 of the northern basin, the coal from which may go over the New York 
 and Erie, and a very small portion of the western basin, the coal from 
 which may go down the Philadelphia and Erie and over the Pennsyl- 
 vania Central and other roads, the whole of this coal must pass over 
 the roads controlled by these six corporations. 
 
 The joint resolution under which this honorable committee was 
 appointed, says, " It has been represented upon good authority that the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company have conspired to im- 
 properly control the mining and transporting and price of coal. The 
 complaint is of grave import, says the resolution, and warrants a care- 
 ful investigation. The evideuce establishes the fact that there is AN 
 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THESE SIX COMPANIES, that the 
 combination was formed in the latter part of the fall of 1872, and that 
 the terms of the agreement have been executed or carried out since 
 the formation of the combination. 
 
 The evidence shows that these six companies have divided between 
 them the whole coal tonnage going to tide-water, to each company is 
 alloted its quota, THEY HAVE FIXED AN ARBITRARY TRICE 
 FOR THE COAL, and agreed that from the price so fixed there should 
 be no abatement. You have been furnished with the prices for Port 
 Richmond, and the price fixed by the Coal Exchange or the Coal and 
 Iron Company at Port Carbon. The facts constituting the grave 
 charge are proven, THE LAW PRONOUNCES THE COMBINA- 
 TION IMPROPER. 
 
 The paper from which I am about to read is admitted to be the 
 agreement between the six companies and has been placed in evidence. 
 I shall not read its entire contents, but only such parts of it as I deem 
 to be necessary in this argument. It contains the following : — 
 
 " That a standing oommittee of six, composed of one representative 
 of each interest, be appointed for the season, to meet monthly, or
 
 8 
 
 oftener, at the call of the chairman, to determine prices and all 
 questions relative to tonnage to competitive points, and to have power, 
 from time to time, to permit an increase or require a curtailment of 
 shipments to competitive points, with a view of regulating the relative 
 demand and supply, provided that any increase or diminution of ship- 
 ments be based upon the percentage of allotment above mentioned, so 
 that each interest shall be entitled to its proper proportion of the 
 aggregate competitive tonnage, whatever the same may be." 
 
 You will remember, gentlemen, that the aggregate fixed upon to go 
 to tide-water was ten millions of tons. Of this, the Philadelphia and 
 Reading Railroad Company was to have as its allotment 2,585,000 
 tons ; the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company was to have 1,588,000 
 tons ; the New Jersey Central Railroad Company was to have 1,615,000 
 tons ; the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, 1,837,000 tons ; the 
 Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, 1,380,000 
 tons; the Pennsylvania Coal Company, 985,000 tons — being in all 
 10,000,000 tons. 
 
 This agreement provides further : " No commission whatever to be 
 allowed upon coal sold at yearly prices, and no contracts at yearly 
 prices to be made with anyone but consumers and retailers, and then 
 only upon the condition that all cargoes of coal so sold shall be 
 received by the purchaser and taken upon the wharf, and not sold or 
 transferred afloat. No sizes to be sold at yearly or season prices except 
 lump, steamboat, broken, egg and chestnut, and egg only to consumers. 
 No commissions exceeding 15 cents per ton to be allowed to any party 
 buying at monthly circular prices, and then only to such as purchase 
 at least 25,000 tons of coal per annum. * * * * 
 
 No allowances to be made for impurity of coal, imperfection in prepa- 
 ration, short weight, or any other reason, without the approval of the 
 committee of six, to whom all such claims are to be reported." 
 
 The committee of six to have power to call for monthly or other 
 reports for each interest upon any subject over which they have 
 control, and to have authority if they desire to examine the sales and 
 tonnage books and accounts of any company or corporation. 
 
 By the witness, Mr. Parrish, who identified this paper as THE 
 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SIX COMPANIES, IN OTHER 
 WORDS, AS THE CONSPIRACY, the combination or confedera- 
 tion, we established one other fact: that in the years 1873 and '74 this 
 programme had been carried out — it was not merely prospective but was
 
 9 
 
 the programme under which the six great corporations had been acting 
 in 1873 and 1874— and that, with the exception of a diminution or some- 
 thing of that kind in the price of one of the articles of coal, a very 
 immaterial alteration, it was the programme under which they were at 
 present acting. We submitted this agreement to you and, I repeat, 
 we have proven that it is the agreement under which the six companies 
 have been acting for the last two years. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you will remember that earlier in the testimony — 
 and I am not taking up the testimony in the order in which it was 
 adduced before you, but in a different order — you will remember that 
 earlier in the testimony we succeeded in getting in evidence what is 
 known as the Constitution and By-Laws of the Coal Exchange. This 
 is a combination, confederation, agreement or whatever you are disposed 
 to call it, between one of these incorporations, the Philadelphia and 
 Heading Coal and Iron Company, and the other producers of coal in 
 what is known as the Schuylkill region. So far as I know, with a few 
 exceptions, they have all signed it; at all events certainly a large 
 number of them have signed it. The Constitution provides, in the 
 fourth section, that "the said officers shall be elected by ballot on the 
 last Thursday of each year, together with a commitee of nine " — (the 
 other committee, gentlemen, was a committee of six ; this provides for 
 a committee of nine) — " which shall meet monthly to establish a 
 minimum price for each and every size of coal for the month following 
 for the line and city trade." 
 
 Senator Herr : Where is the evidence for the allegation that the 
 production was to be limited ? According to Mr. Parrish, it was only 
 the surplus and that was only to be limited when they had no market. 
 That is my recollection on the point. The counsel will see that it is 
 a very serious matter, and if he will just refer to the evidence on which 
 he bases his proposition, he may throw some light upon it. 
 
 Mr. Lane : I can only reply to the senator's query by referring to 
 the language of the agreement, which I have already quoted and which 
 I will again read. It is as follows : " That a standing committee of 
 six, composed of one representative of each interest, be appointed for 
 the season, to meet monthly or oftener, at the call of the chairman, to 
 determine prices and all questions relative to tonnage to competitive 
 points, and to have power, from time to time, to permit an increase or 
 require a curtailment of shipments to competitive points."
 
 10 
 
 Senator Herr : The language is "shipments to certain points" or 
 " to competitive points." There was no limit upon the production ; the 
 matter relates only to a surplus. They could make contracts with 
 other parties ; that is my recollection of the evidence. If I am wrong, 
 the gentleman can correct me. 
 
 Mr. Lane : i do not desire to correct the senator, because we only 
 differ in the fact that he is upon one point while I am upon another. 
 I am now only speaking of the contract entered into between these 
 companies, and I am speaking of the testimony of Mr. Parrish, 
 wherein he says that this contract was carried out ; I have not gone 
 any further as to the testimony. 
 
 The Constitution of the Schuylkill Coal Exchange, which, as I have 
 already stated, was signed by the Coal and Iron Company and other 
 operators provides that " the said officers shall be elected by ballot on 
 the last Thursday of each year, together with a committee of nine, 
 which committee shall meet monthly to establish a minimum price for 
 each and every size of coal, for the month following, for the line and 
 city trade." And, as I am upon that point. I desire to say now that 
 we have distinctly proven that for the last two years the price for coal 
 has been established for every month, and the price published by the 
 Coal and Iron Company. " And shall also have full power and 
 authority to curtail the shipments or stop the production if necessary 
 — providing that all curtailments or stoppages shall bear equally on all 
 collieries — or transact any other business which may be for the general 
 interest of the operators. " 
 
 The By-Laws contain a prohibition against any person not a mem- 
 ber, not representing a member or not invited by a vote of the 
 association, being present at or taking part in any meeting. It thus 
 appears to be a secret association. Certain publications by their 
 authority appeared in the newspapers, but you will see, by section fifth 
 of the By-Laws, that THIS IS A SECRET ASSOCIATION. The 
 section reads : " No person who is not a member or who does not repre- 
 sent a member, or who is not invited by a vote of the association, shall 
 be present and take part in any meeting." 
 
 Section tenth provides that " We do hereby agree that the action of 
 the combined companies shall govern all coal for competitive points 
 that goes to Port Richmond for shipment, and all that is shipped by 
 way of the Schuylkill Canal, and consigned to points upon or through 
 the line of the Delaware and Raritan Canal for the shipping season of
 
 11 
 
 1875, and we do hereby agree to abide by such action, and do empower 
 the President or Vice-President of the Philadelphia and Reading Coal 
 and Iron Company to represent ua in the premises, and pledge our- 
 selves to do all things necessary to carry out the same. 
 
 Article first provides that "A minimum price shall be established, as 
 above stated, for each and every size of coal to be fixed at Port Car- 
 bon, and to be in force for the month following." 
 
 Article third provides that " Whenever coal is shipped according to 
 orders and is refused by the consignee, no coal is to be sold to the 
 party so refusing until he or they shall have paid to the consignor all 
 losses or expenses arising from the transfer and resale of such coal. 
 The facts thereof shall at once be reported by the consignor to the 
 president of the committee on prices, who shall have power to appoint, 
 if necessary, an inspector, whose report shall be laid by the president 
 before the committee for its further action thereon." 
 
 It is further provided : "All bills for coal are payable on or before 
 the tenth day of the month following that in which the coal is shipped, 
 but no penalty shall be attached for non-paymeut until after the 
 twentieth. Interest shall be added on all coal sold on time from the 
 first day of the month following that in which the coal is delivered at 
 the shipping point for shipment by railroad, and from date of bill of 
 lading for shipment by canal." 
 
 " While we bind ourselves in honor to honestly and faithfully carry 
 out the above resolutions, we further agree to allow no commission, 
 abatement or deduction from the monthly circular rates, nor allow any 
 agent or middle interest to divide his or their commissions or profits 
 with any manufacturer, dealer or consumer, or make any allowance or 
 concession in price from the monthly rates for any cause whatever." 
 
 We have said, gentlemen of the committee, that this combination, 
 into which these corporations have entered, is not only in conflict with 
 the law, but that IT IS A CRIME ; and in saying this, gentlemen, we 
 do not give utterance merely to our own individual opinion. We say 
 that a combination or an agreement of the character of this one, and 
 one so very like that which we have now read as to be almost identical 
 with it, has already been passed upon by the Supreme Court of Penn- 
 sylvania. I propose to read from it such parts as are similar to the 
 one in this case, and such parts as I think are very material to the 
 question here raised ; so that, having the two before you together, you 
 may be enabled to show the legislature, if you can, when making up
 
 12 
 
 the report which you propose to frame and submit to that body, 
 wherein a combination, which has been PRONOUNCED BY THE 
 SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, TO BE ILLEGAL, 
 A MONOPOLY, AND THEREFORE A CRIME, differs from the 
 combination which has been entered into by the six carrying com- 
 panies on the one hand, and the combination which has been entered 
 into by the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company and the 
 operators on the other hand. 
 
 '* The contract to which I now call your attention, was entered into 
 the 15th day of February, A. D. 1866, between the Fall Brook Coal 
 Company, party of the first part ; the Morris Run Coal Company, 
 party of the second part; of the Blossburg Coal region, as follows, 
 to wit : — 
 
 ' The said coal companies do severally agree with each other that 
 the market for bituminous coal from the Blossburg and from the Bar- 
 clay regions (except as hereinafter mentioned), shall be divided 
 between the two coal regions, so that the Blossburg region shall have 
 the right and privilege of supplying, by the said two companies above 
 mentioned, 70 per cent, of the whole quantity of coal sent to market, 
 and the Barclay region 30 per cent. ; and that the shares of each 
 region shall be subdivided between the coal companies of each region 
 as they may agree among themselves.' 
 
 ' It is understood that all coal mined and sold by the Morris Run 
 Coal Company to the Salt Company of Onondaga, under their lease of 
 the said salt company mines, and used for the manufacture of salt on 
 the Onondaga salt reservation, shall not be counted as a part of said 
 Morris Run Coal Company's portion of the market, and said coal shall 
 not be considered as included in this agreement in any way whatever, 
 but the same is expressly excepted herefrom.' 
 
 ' The business contemplated by this agreement shall be under the 
 control of an executive committee of three persons, one to be appointed 
 by the party of the first part, one by the party of the second part, 
 and one by the parties of the third, fourth and fifth parts, jointly, and 
 until otherwise ordered by the parties respectively, the members of the 
 committee shall consist of, &c. * * * * * *•' " 
 
 You will remember, gentlemen of the committee, that in the Coal 
 and Iron Company's division of votes, the regulation was that every 
 fifty thousand tons should constitute a vote. In this case the votes are 
 distributed between the parties, as will appear from the following:
 
 13 
 
 u In the decision by the said committee of all questions of general 
 interest of the parties hereto, the members of the committee from the 
 Blossburg region shall have two votes, and the member from the Barclay 
 region one vote ; but in the decision of questions of adverse interests 
 between the two coal regions, the member of the committee from the 
 Barclay region shall have equal power with the Blossburg members; 
 with provisions for an umpire in case of a tie vote." 
 
 * * * 'The committee shall appoint a general sales agent, and such 
 other agents and assistants/ &c, to * * * be paid by the several parties 
 hereto in proportion to the respective portion of the market supplied 
 by them.' 
 
 ' The average price received for coal will be arrived at in the following 
 manner, to wit, &c. : * * * 
 
 The committee will, from time to time, adjust the prices of coal for 
 the different markets, and the conditions of the sale thereof.' 
 
 ' The committee will from time to time adjust and fix the rates of 
 freight from Watkins, and such other matters as pertain thereto.' * * 
 
 'It being understood and agreed by said parties that all sales, ship- 
 ments and deliveries, by or for either or any of said parties, except as 
 herein specifically excluded from the terms of this agreement, shall as 
 between these parties and for the purposes of this agreement be deemed 
 to be made by said committee through such general sales agent, in the 
 name and for the account of the party furnishing the coal, and that each 
 of said parties shall, unless said committee shall otherwise direct or 
 provide, refer and send at once all orders or propositions received by 
 them respectively, relating to the sale of coal, to said general sales 
 agent prior to any action by themselves thereon, and said general sales 
 agent shall advise said parties from time to time of the whole amount 
 of coal shipped by all the parties, and shall direct a suspension of ship- 
 ments or deliveries by either party making such sales or deliveries 
 beyond its proportion.' 
 
 ' Each party hereto agrees that they will not cause or permit any coal 
 to be shipped or sold otherwise than as the same has been herein agreed 
 upon, and that all rules and regulations of said executive committee, in 
 relation to the business provided for in this agreement, shall be truly 
 and faithfully carried out." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, after examining the constitution and by-laws of 
 the Coal Exchange, and after comparing them with the contract or 
 agreement that I have just read, and having compared the agreement
 
 14 
 
 entered into by the six carrying companies with the agreement from 
 which I before quoted, I say to you that you will fail to see any mate- 
 rial point upon which they differ. The OBJECT OF BOTH WAS TO 
 KEEP UP THE PBICE OF COAL, and the manner of attaining that 
 object was in each case the same — to limit, curtail, and, if necessary, 
 stop production. In this other instance, the validity of the contract was 
 tested in the courts, and, as I have said, we have a decision of the Su- 
 preme Court upon the question. Long before that decision, the law 
 was well understood by the bar and bench to be that all contracts in 
 restraint of trade were bad. Within a very recent period, the courts 
 have decided that certain contracts which were partially in restraint of 
 trade might be carried out, but expressly held that all contracts 
 which were absolutely in restraint of trade were void and could not 
 be carried out, because such contracts are against public policy. The 
 decision to which I call your attention covers the whole case, and cites 
 all the authorities. I refer to Morris Run Coal Co. vs. The Barclay 
 Coal Co., 18 P. F. Smith, 173. 
 
 Judge Agnew, in delivering the opinion of the court says : — " The 
 illegality of the contracts affecting public trade appears in the books 
 under many forms. The most frequent is that of contracts between 
 individuals to restrain one of them from performimg a business or 
 employment. The subject was elaborately discussed in the leading case 
 of Mitchell vs. Reynolds, 1 Peere Williams 181 ; to be found also in 
 1 Smith's Leading Cases, 172." 
 
 Senator Herr. The opinion from which you are reading is that of 
 Judge Agnew ? 
 
 Gen. Lane. From Judge Agnew's opinion; yes sir. It proceeds 
 as follows : The distinction is there taken which now marks the current 
 of judicial decisious everywhere: that a restraint upon a trade or 
 employment which is general is void, being contrary to public interest, 
 and really beneficial to neither party, and oppressive at least to one. 
 
 " General restraints (says Parker, J.) are all void, whether by bond, 
 covenant or promise, with or without consideration, and whether it be 
 of the party's own trade or not ; " citing Crokc Jam. 596 ; 2 Buls. 136 ; 
 Allen 67. To obtain, he says, the sole exercise of any known trade 
 throughout England, is a complete monopoly, and AGAINST THE 
 POLICY OF THE LAW. A reason given is " the great abuses these 
 voluntary restraints are liable to, as, for instance, from corporations 
 who were perpetually laboring for exclusive advantages in trade, and to
 
 15 
 
 reduce it into as few hands as possible." In reference to a contract not 
 to trade in any part of England, it is said, there is something more than 
 a presumption against it, because it never can be useful to any man to 
 restrain another from trading in all places, though it may be to restrain 
 him from trading in some, unless he intends a monopoly, which is a 
 crime. These principles have been sustained in many cases which 
 need not be cited, as most of them will be found in Mr. Smith's note 
 to the leading case. What is injurious to the public interest is void 
 on the ground of public policy. 
 
 ' The general rule (said Woodward, C. J.) is that all restraints of 
 trade, if nothing more appear, are bad : Keeler vs. Taylor. 3 P. F. 
 Smith 468. That case may be instanced as a strong illustration of the 
 rule as to what is not a reasonable restriction ; and the principles I have 
 been stating are recognized in the opinion. Keeler agreed to instruct 
 Taylor in the art of making platform scales, and to employ him in that 
 business at $1.75 per day. Taylor engaged to pay Keeler or his legal 
 representatives $50 for each and every scale he should thereafter make 
 for any other person than Keeler, or which should be made by impart- 
 ing his information to others. This was held to be an unreasonable 
 restriction upon Taylor's labor, and therefore void, as in restraint of 
 trade ********** 
 
 ' There is a certain freedom which must be allowed to every one in 
 the management of his own affairs. When competition is left free, 
 individual error or folly will generally find a correction in the conduct 
 of others. But here is a combination of all the companies operating 
 in the Blossburg and Barclay mining regions, and controlling their 
 entire productions. They have COMBINED TOGETHER TO GOV- 
 ERN THE SUPPLY and the price of coal in all the markets from the 
 Hudson to the Missisippi rivers and from Pennsylvania to the Lakes. 
 This combination has a power in its confederated form which no indi- 
 vidual action can confer. The PUBLIC INTEREST MUST SUC- 
 CUMB to it, for it has left no competition free to correct its baleful 
 influence. When the supply of coal is suspended, the demand for it 
 becomes importunate, and prices must rise. Or if the supply goes 
 forward, the price fixed by the confederates must accompany it. The 
 domestic hearth, the furnaces of the iron master, and the fires of the 
 manufacturer, all feel the restraint, while many dependent hands are 
 paralyzed, and hungry mouths are stinted. The influence of a lack 
 of supply or a rise in the price of an article of such prime necessity,
 
 16 
 
 cannot be measured. It permeates the entire mass of community, and 
 leaves few of its members untouched by its withering blight." 
 
 Says Judge Agnew : Such a combination is more than a contract — 
 it is an offence. In all such combinations where the purpose is injurious 
 or unlawful, the gist of the offence is the conspiracy. Men can often 
 do by the combination of many, what severally no one can accomplish, 
 and even what when done by one would be innocent." Instances are 
 given in The Commonwealth vs. Carlisle Bright R. 40, among those 
 mentioned as criminal is a combination of the bakers of a town to hold 
 up the article of bread, and by means of the scarcity thus produced to 
 extort an exorbitant price for it. The case presented is precisely 
 parallel with the present case ; it is the effect of the act upon the public 
 which gives that case, and this, its evil aspect as the result of confede- 
 ration. 
 
 Without going on, gentlemen, to read any further in the case, I may 
 say that the unanimous conclusion of the court was that this combi- 
 nation WAS ILLEGAL AND THEREFORE VOID. 
 
 Now, I am unable to see any difference or any distinction between 
 this combination passed upon by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania 
 and the combination now under investigation by this committee. Both 
 were for a RESTRAINT OF TRADE ; both were to fix arbitrary prices 
 upon an article of prime necessity. The one condemned by the court 
 controlled all of one region : there was no competition there. The one 
 now under investigation controls all of another region, and not only 
 all of that region, but, so far as we have any knowledge, all the coal 
 of that kind in the world, certainly all that has ever been discovered 
 in Pennsylvania. 
 
 Judge Morton, in the case of Alger vs. Thacher, 19 Pickering, 54, 
 in speaking of these combinations or contracts in restraint of trade, 
 uses this language : " The unreasonableness of contracts in restraint of 
 trade and business is very apparent from several obvious considerations. 
 First, such contracts injure the parties making them, because they 
 diminish their means of procuring livelihoods and a competency for 
 their families. They tempt improvident persons, for the sake of 
 present gain, to deprive themselves of the power to make future 
 acquisition, and they expose such persons to imposition and oppression. 
 Second, They tend to deprive the public of the service of men in the 
 employments and capacities in which they may be most useful to the 
 community as well as themselves. Third, THEY DISCOURAGE
 
 17 
 
 INDUSTRY and enterprise, and diminish the products of ingenuity and 
 skill. Fourth, They prevent competition and ENHANCE PRICES. 
 Fifth, They expose the public to all the evils of monopoly, and this 
 especially is applicable to wealthy companies and large corporations, 
 who have the means, unless restrained by law, to exclude rivalry, 
 MONOPOLIZE BUSINESS AND ENGROSS THE MARKET. 
 Against evils like these, wise laws protect individuals and the public 
 by declaring all such contracts void." 
 
 [At this point the committee adjourned till five o'clock, p. m.] 
 
 Evening Session. 
 
 Pursuant to an adjournment, the committee reassembled at five 
 o'clock, p. m., when Gen. Lane immediately proceeded with his argu- 
 ment — resuming as follows : — 
 
 Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee : — It will not be 
 claimed that the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company 
 or the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company possessed any 
 chartered right to make a contract such as that which they have made. 
 No power to make any such contract is given to them in their charter 
 in words, and the claim upon which its assumption is sought to be 
 justified, rests solely upon an implication. If you will look over the 
 charter of the Coal and Iron Company, you will find that, while they 
 have many powers therein enumerated, this is not one of them. If the 
 contract was, as 1 have claimed, against public policy, one calculated 
 to produce and which did produce a monopoly — and therefore a crime 
 — it was clearly an abuse of the franchise granted to this company by 
 the legislature. THE GIST OF THE OFFENCE IS THE CON- 
 SPIRACY. 
 
 That the two companies or one of the companies (both being the 
 same in everything but name) did enter into the combination with the 
 five other companies is clearly proven ; that one of the companies or 
 the two companies (both being identical) did enter into a combination 
 with the other coal producers of the Schuylkill region is clearly 
 proven ; that the agreement or contract entered into with the other 
 five companies was carried out, is just as clearly proven' by the wit- 
 nesses, and as a conclusion of law they have misused and abused their 
 franchise. And here let me observe that we hesitated somewhat before 
 going into that kind of proof, because it was so well known by every, 
 man whose attention had been called to the business, it was a fact so
 
 18 
 
 universally accredited and a matter of sucli public notoriety that a 
 combination .such as here alleged had existed, that it had maintained 
 the price of coal and caused the price to appreciate both at retail and 
 at wholesale at Richmond, that we did not like to go very far in 
 establishing before you, gentlemen, a fact which to all the world was 
 already perfectly well known. We took it for granted that we were 
 not here before you to play at the game of special pleading with lawyers 
 and judges, but we assumed that we stood before gentlemen who were 
 seeking information from all proper sources and who, being reasonably 
 well informed upon current events, knew of this combination; for, 
 unless you are all Rip Van Winkles and have been asleep for the last 
 three or four years, you did know of it. For this reason we hesitated 
 a little, I say, before we went on to prove that this combination had 
 been carried out; well, in the course of the testimony the fact very 
 naturally became apparent. Mr. Parrish, in answer to the question, 
 " was this combination carried out by the six companies," said, " It 
 was." Mr. Rorda testified, in his examination, that THE COMBINA- 
 TION WAS CARRIED OUT; he made an arrangement with Mr. 
 Parrish to receive from him twenty-thousand tons of coal; and after 
 the arrangement had been entered into, Mr. Parrish came to him and 
 said, " I can't let you have it; we are not to allow any commission by 
 the terms of the agreement." You will remember it, gentlemen- 
 " To allow you a commission would be, by the terms of the agreement, 
 to break the combination." He testifies distinctly that it was carried 
 out. All the acts of the company, not only as we have them in 
 proof but as admitted by them, show that the intention was to carry 
 out the terms of that agreement; in other words, the intention was to 
 form a perfect, systematic combination by which these six companies 
 should control all the coal tonnage that should go to tide-water, and 
 tbe agreement was executed to the letter. 
 
 JNow prior to 1872, when the Coal and Iron Company came into 
 existence, there was no combination of this kind either between the 
 carrying companies or between the producers. Indeed such a thing 
 was an impossibility. The law had protected Schuylkill County from 
 these corporations and combinations ; and while the private operators 
 were in Schuylkill County and while the Reading Railroad was 
 restricted to its legitimate business as a common carrier only, while 
 the Railroad made its money, paid its expenses and declared its divi- 
 dends on what it earned by tonnage, and tonnage only, the private
 
 19 
 
 operators were furnished with all needed facilities, while the factors 
 and dealers were finding a market for all the coal sent to them, any 
 irregularity being corrected by the natural remedy for all such irregu- 
 larities, the law of supply and demand, such a combination was not a 
 necessity, such a combination was an impossibility. Every attempt to 
 raise prices by stopping production fur even a limited period was 
 steadily resisted by the Railroad Company, and denounced as a short- 
 si ghted policy. And let me here call your attention to the language 
 made use of by the managers of the Reading Railroad Company, at 
 that time, when criticising in severe terms the policy adopted by the 
 workingmen : — 
 
 : 'Auother great evil results from the attempt of the Workingmen's 
 Association to enforce the short-sighted policy of raising prices by 
 stopping the production of coal, forgetting that high prices and 
 uncertainty of supply will drive away buyers, force manufacturers to 
 turn to other fuels and prevent the natural increase of demand which 
 would result from low prices, and which would soon supply a certain 
 market for any temporary over-production." 
 
 This was the language of the managers in their report in 1871, 
 before it became necessary to improve Laurel Run or before this 
 Laurel Run incorporation had been brought into existence. Now the 
 very next annual report of the managers of the Reading Railroad 
 (that of 1872) contains this statement: "Up to this time, about 
 70,000 acres of the best coal lands of Pennsylvania have been 
 acquired and will be held by an auxiliary company, known as the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company, of which the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company is the only stockholder. 
 The result of this action has been to secure and attach to the 
 company's railroad a body of coal lands capable of supplying all the 
 coal tonnage that can possibly be transported over the road for 
 centuries." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if they were only securing lands in order to 
 acquire twnuage, if that was their only object, one would think that, 
 in laying hold upon such body of coal lands as was " capable of sup- 
 plying all the coal tonnage that can possibly be transported over the 
 road for centuries," they were providing very liberally for the future; 
 yet they were not satisfied. They had entered into this combination 
 in lh72, and the other companies, so far as we know, were already in 
 a condition to act, but still they did not feel themselves secure, and in 
 the report of the managers for 1873, they say : — ■
 
 20 
 
 " The Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company has con- 
 tinued to increase its ownership of lands," [For what purpose, gentle- 
 men ? They had already 70,000 acres, but they continue to increase 
 their purchases of land,] " and now control over 80,000 acres of coal 
 land, upon which they have ninety-eight collieries. Most of these 
 collieries are worked by lessees, but twenty-seven of the largest of 
 them are now open and will be worked by the company. The tonnage 
 of these lands, last year, was 3,030,880.8, and the rent derived from 
 this tonnage amounted to $946,774.69. Almost the entire issue of 
 $19,000,000 of the consolidated mortgage loan was applied to the 
 purchase and development of these lands; in addition to which, the 
 bonds of the Coal and Iron Company, guaranteed by the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Railroad Company to the extent of §11,130,000, have 
 been issued for the same purpose. Should the anticipations formed 
 of the coal trade for the coming season prove correct, the managers 
 believe that the coal and Iron Company will, during this year (which 
 is but the second of its existence,) be in receipt of an income 
 sufficient to pay the interest upon the entire cost of this property." 
 
 Can't it be said, after this, that the Coal and Iron Company must 
 have been selling coal at a loss ? While working for a monopoly of 
 all the business, they were not paying interest on the cost of the 
 property. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, one would think that their accumulation of coal 
 lands was already sufficient to satisfy them. Seventy-thousand acres 
 was enough, they said, to supply them with tonnage for centuries: 
 now, they have eighty-thousand. But, in their report for 1874, they 
 say, " The Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company now 
 owns and controls about ninety-thousand acres of anthracite coal 
 lauds." In the report for 1875, the Company say, "The purchase of 
 coal lands made during the year by the Philadelphia and Reading 
 Coal and Iron Company, added to the previously acquired, will make 
 an aggregate of ONE HUNDRED-THOUSAND ACRES OF 
 LAND." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if this means anything, it certainly means that 
 this company intends to buy up all the lands for the purpose of 
 enabling it to carry out its agreement with the other companies, and 
 thus monopolize the business. 
 
 '■ When it is considered," say the managers, " that the anthracite 
 coal trade of the United States has now reached an annual product of
 
 21 
 
 nineteen millions of tons ; that it has doubled every ten years during 
 the past, and that in ten years it will be forty-millions of tons ; that 
 the Philadelphia and Reading Goal and Iron Company OWNS AT 
 LEAST ONE-THIRD OF ALL THE ANTHRACITE coal fields 
 ol Pennsylvania. * * 
 
 When the other two-thirds are owned by the other five companies, all 
 this land is placed in mortmain; for let it be remembered, that these 
 companies are perpetual, that they never die, and that when they own 
 the other two-thirds of this coal land — how much they now own I do 
 not kuow, but I do know that it is a very considerable amount — when 
 they own the other two-thirds, EVERY FOOT OF ANTHRACITE 
 COAL LAND IN PENNSYLVANIA WILL BE BEYOND THE 
 BEACH OF ANY INDIVIDUAL OPERATOR. 
 
 When this was all arranged satisfactorily, the next move was to get 
 rid of the men at the other end of the line. The acquisition of this 
 large amount of land and this great number of coal mines was but 
 one of two objects: the other object was to get rid of what has been 
 denominated "the middle men," in other words, the factors, the men 
 who had grown up with this Beading Bailroad Company, had nursed 
 it from its infancy and had paid it millions upon millions of dollars of 
 tonnage. In submitting the very large amount of testimony which 
 we have presented to you, we endeavored to bring and, so far as we 
 could do so, did bring before you the representative men in each one 
 of the different branches of the coal business. We have not called 
 all the miners, we have not called all the retail men, we have not 
 called all the factors, as we might have done, but we have called only 
 a few from each one of these various departments of the business, 
 taking care that these few shall be representative of the class for 
 which they speak. Among others, we introduced to you Mr. Joseph 
 Van Dusen, who stated to you that he had been IN THE BUSINESS 
 FOB THIBTY YEABS, that he had built up a business of from fifty 
 to three hundred-thousand tons per annum; that in 1873 he could do 
 about as much business, he thought, as he did in 1872 ; and that he has 
 since known no fact that changes his mind about it. Then, gentlemen, 
 we called your attention to the custom of the railroad, to its rules with 
 shippers, showing that when these factors^entered into a contract with 
 the consignee in the east or in New York, the Bailroad Company 
 required the factor to deposit with it the original ^contract entered 
 into with the consignee or the purchaser. As each cargo of coal went
 
 22 
 
 forward, a bill of lading accompanied it. When the coal was delivered, 
 the consignee receipted for the coal. That was returned and placed 
 with the railroad. The railroad thereby became thoroughly acquainted 
 with all the business of these factors, knew just to whom they were 
 selling, knew just whether the person who made a contract received 
 all the coal that he had contracted for — knew all about it. Now, I 
 have never heard one individual enter a single complaint against the 
 railroad for anything done in that respect. These gentlemen are 
 all satisfied with the course of the railroad in that. It was proper, 
 they say, and they do not complain of it. But there is good ground 
 for complaint here. When the Coal and Iron Company came into 
 existence, it was enabled, by virtue of its connection with the Railroad 
 Company and the information it thus acquired, to step in and IN 
 ONE DAY TAKE ALL THIS TRADE, knowing where the trade 
 was that Joseph Van Dusen had been thirty years in building up, and 
 by depriving him of his wharf, take his business; and I say to you, 
 gentlemen of the committee, that that is a fair and legitimate cause of 
 complaint. When the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania parted with sonie 
 of her sovereignty and gave it to this Coal and Iron Company, did that 
 company, upon coming into the market, drive out these middlemen 
 BY FAIR AND OPEN COMPETITION? NOT AT ALL. The 
 Reading Railroad Company owned the wharves, which were the 
 terminus by rail for all coal going to tide-water, and it exercised 
 the arbitrary power of saying just who should have the wharves 
 and who should not have them. We have proven to you that 
 not only factors but even miners of coal have been deprived of 
 the privilege of having a wharf, for no other reason than that the 
 Reading Railroad Company said, " we will not give you one." The 
 power which they exercise in this respect may be theirs ; I do not pro- 
 pose to controvert that; besides their power is so enormous in the 
 aggregate, that it would be hardly worth while to complain of this 
 comparatively trivial feature of it. We have shown you that every 
 pound of coal that goes out of the Delaware River passing over the 
 Reading railroad, must pass over the Richmond wharves; no man can 
 do the business of shipping coal from Philadelphia, unless he has wharf 
 facilities at Richmond. This company is enabled to grant or to with- 
 hold such facilities at its own pleasure, and while conferring them upon 
 a new comer may, without a day's notice or a moment's warning, 
 deprive any old shipper of the means of doing business. When
 
 23 
 
 Joseph Van Dusen had his offices in Philadelphia, his offices in New 
 Fork, his offices in Boston ; when he had a tonnage oi' sixty or 
 seventy-thousand tons per annum ; when he was making arrangements 
 to do as large a business in 1S73 as he had done in 1872, the circular 
 of December 27th, 1872, was issued, making it an impossibility for 
 him to get a wharf another day. The Philadelphia and Heading Coal 
 and Iron Company stepped in, and we have evidence that a very con- 
 siderable amount of the business that was being done by Joseph Van 
 Dusen, was afterwards done by the Reading Coal and Iron Company. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, you are told that this company has rendered itself 
 inimical to some of these middlemen. Why, let me ask, how could 
 the result be otherwise ? A man's business is as much his own as is 
 his money ; and when you deprive him of a business for which he has 
 .spent years in building up, you deprive him of that which is as 
 valuable to him as is his money or his lands. If you give to a corpora- 
 tion the power to strike down the business of this or that man in the 
 coal trade, why should you withhold, in any other instance, a license 
 to a corporation to strike down an individual in any other business ? 
 Suppose the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania should LICENSE or 
 empower a particular individual or company TO SELL ALL THE 
 DRY GOODS that are sold in Philadelphia, and suppose this indi- 
 vidual or company should issue to Messrs. Hood, Bonbrigbt & Co., 
 and the other merchants, a circular, such as was issued by this Railroad 
 Company on the 27th of December, 1872, stopping their business — 
 what would be the effect of such a proceeding ? Why, gentlemen, 
 IT WOULD CREATE A REVOLUTION. The exercise of this 
 power on the part of the Railroad Company may be perfectly natural ; 
 we all know how natural it is for us to stretch power when we have 
 it; but I say that to permit such a power to remain in any corpo- 
 ration or any body of men, is simply monstrous. 
 
 But, as I have said, in order to maintain this combination, it became 
 necessary to strike down these men. It could not have been main- 
 tained if the factors and middlemen had been permitted to go on and 
 sell as they had been doing, and therefore it became necessary to form 
 what you have heard mentioned as "the pool." We come, therefore, 
 to consider the evidence which sustains the allegation that this combi- 
 nation had been carried out by the six companies. Now, we all know 
 that in 1873 there was a financial crisis in this couutry, and that every 
 industry of the country other than coal, especially the manufacturing
 
 24 
 
 and producing interests of the country, became more or less paralyzed. 
 Notwithstanding every other article felt the panic and became 
 depreciated, you find that day after day and month after montb the 
 price of coal was appreciating. Take the prices of the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Coal and Iron Company for a representative coal, and 
 you will find that, in January, 1873, the company was selling stove 
 coal at $5.50, and in January, 1874, they were selling it at $5.75. 
 And, if this combination is to be maintained, there is no power to pre- 
 vent their going on increasing the price to any amount that they may 
 please to charge. 
 
 Senator Rutan : How was it in 1875 — was there any iucrease 
 in 1875? 
 
 General Lane: The increase in 1875, it will be remembered was 
 after the lock-out or, as some of the gentlemen have called it, " the 
 strike." The published price was $5.80, but there was no coal coming 
 into the market in January, 1875. 
 
 Mr. Gowen (aside) : Oh, we had plenty of coal ; the price of stove 
 was $5.80. 
 
 Gen. Lane: The gentleman says the price of stove was $5.80; and, 
 giving him all the benefit of that showing, you will sec that even then 
 he did raise the price five cents on the ton. You may take any year 
 during the existence of this Coal and Iron Company, and the result is 
 the same. Take, for instance, the price of coal delivered on board 
 vessels at Port Richmond in 1873 ; hard white ash coal (lump) 
 was $4.40. 
 
 Mr. Gowen : The price varied with different months. 
 
 Gen. Lane: Well, I have been taking one particular month in each 
 year. Take the same month of the next year, and the price of hard 
 white ash (lump) coal was $4.60 — an appreciation of twenty cents per 
 ton. Now, if these gentlemen will go on, year after year, increasing 
 the price at the rate of twenty cents a ton per year, but a few years 
 will elapse before you get it up to such a price, that the receipts from 
 these lands will not only pay interest, but will enable their owner, the 
 Reading Railroad Company, to pay its dividend. It may by this 
 means be able to pay a dividend that will surprise and GRATIFY 
 THOSE ENGLISH BOND-HOLDERS who are said to have excited 
 our French friend, Mr. Borda. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I am speaking of facts that go to show that these 
 combinations have been carried out to the letter ; and, notwithstanding
 
 25 
 
 that we put the other side upon notice in advance as to what we 
 proposed to establish, you have not heard from them a word of expla- 
 nation or denial. 
 
 During the examination, being desirous of knowing something about 
 how cars were distributed in the coal region, we called a few gentlemen 
 — truthful gentlemen, all of them — and ascertained from them the fact 
 that when the mines were averaged or rated at so many cars each per 
 day, all the empty cars that arrived within the jurisdiction of Mr. 
 Hesser were honestly and fairly distributed. It is not doubted by any 
 one that every car that went to him was honestly and fairly distributed, 
 and, gentlemen, that was not the point at issue. The point at issue 
 was, how many cars went to him. One of the Articles in the Consti- 
 tution and By-Laws of the Coal Exchange provides that, when it 
 becomes necessary, the combination or six companies may CURTAIL 
 OR STOP PRODUCTION. How are they to "stop production," 
 how are they to "curtail," — what is the meaning of that? The 
 process consists in lessening the number of cars available for distri- 
 bution, by using a certain proportion of them as store-houses. 
 
 The Reading Railroad Company, being a common carrier, is obliged 
 to carry whenever a demand is made upon it and it has the cars or the 
 requisite carrying facilities at its command. There is no alternative; 
 it must carry when it has the means to carry. But there is a process 
 to which they may resort by way of avoiding this requirement of their 
 charter, whenever it is to their interest so to do. Whenever the 
 market is not sufficiently active to take all the coal, or their quota is 
 full, it simply TURNS ITS CARS INTO STORE-HOUSES. Then 
 when TEN-THOUSAND CARS have been converted into depositaries 
 for coal, — as we have proven to you they were — there is only one-half 
 the number of cars to go to the mines that would otherwise be available 
 for the purpose, and consequently but one-half the number of cars to be 
 distributed. This arrangement is for the mutual benefit of the Reading 
 Railroad and its auxiliary, the Reading Coal and Iron Company. The 
 former can at any time it sees fit, turn the coal of the Coal and Iron 
 Company into the cars, and the latter is not going to complain against 
 the Railroad Company because of a non-delivery of its coal, because 
 the two companies are the same thing, the interests of each are 
 identical and both have the same officers. Thus the Railroad 
 Company can turn its cars into storehouses and put them upon the 
 sidings; and, when a call for cars is made the next day, they can
 
 26 
 
 reply, "we have only such a number to distribute.'' Mr. Hesser was 
 kiud enough to furnish us with a list of the calls that were made, but 
 I cannot at this moment put my hand upon it. It is shown, however, 
 that this practice of turning the cars into store-houses continued until 
 in July and August, 1874, the percentage of distribution ran down as 
 low as seventeen per cent, j that is, an operator ENTITLED TO 
 ONE-HUNDRED CARS GOT SEVENTEEN per cent, of what 
 he called for. Now, the answer to this is perfectly natural — I under- 
 stand it — that there was no market for the coal, that " we could not 
 find a market for the coal." Rut that is what we are now complaining 
 of. Had there been no monopoly, had there been no combination, 
 had producers been permitted to sell at their own prices and to reduce 
 the price of coal, there would have been a market for the coal. That 
 is the very thing we complain of— that THIS COMBINATION 
 HOLDS UP THE PRICE and that, whether there is coal demanded 
 or coal not demanded, the price is all the same. 
 
 Under the rule adopted by this committee, permitting the other side 
 to examine in chief a witness called by ourselves, the counsel for the 
 companies drew from Mr. Rrenizer, whom we had called, the fact that 
 pig iron sold in 1874 for twenty dollars per ton less than it did in 1872 
 — that it had depreciated at the rate of twenty dollars per ton — and 
 he admits to you at the same time, that the COAL THAT GOES 
 INTO the manufacture of that PIG IRON cost on an average from 
 fifty ceuts to one dollar per ton MORE IN 1874, THAN IT COST 
 IN 1872. The proofs we have laid before you are conclusive that in 
 the panic of 1873, while the profit in every other industry had depre- 
 ciated, coal at Port Carbon (the place where the price was fixed) was 
 higher in 1873 and 1874, than it was in 1872. Perhaps no better 
 illustration of the power of this coal combination could be cited than 
 the fact that while iron sells in 1874 for twenty dollars per ton less 
 than the price realized for it in 1872, the cost of the coal used in 
 its production ranges at from fifty cents to one dollar per ton higher 
 than was charged for it in 1872. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I ask you can you say, when called upon to make 
 your report to the legislature aud people of the state of Pennsylvania, 
 that that state of affairs could have existed for one day except through 
 a combination, such as has been here shown to have been created. 
 
 That this combination did exist and was carried out, you have the 
 proofs before you in the testimony, but you are not limited to the
 
 27 
 
 testimony for proofs of its existence and operations. You are at 
 liberty and as legislators are bound to acquire from any source of 
 information that may be available to you, aud from which you may 
 obtain the facts, all the information concerning it that is obtainable. 
 If then this combination in restraint of trade does exist, and if the 
 law, as pronounced by the Supreme Court of the state, is to prevail in 
 this case, I say that you have nothing to do but to report the fact of 
 an abuse of power on the part of these companies. 
 
 We come now to the question of THE REMEDY TO BE AP- 
 PLIED. Has the legislature the power to act in the premises? Can 
 the legislature by a law. give us the remedy? A charter is a contract 
 between the legislature and the incorporators, and it will not be doubted 
 by any lawyer that prior to 1857, in view of the protection guaranteed 
 to all such contracts by the Federal Constitution, the law in Pennsylvania 
 was pretty well established that before the legislature could take 
 action upon a charter, the fact of an abuse or misuse thereof must be 
 found by a court of competent jurisdiction. But does this require- 
 ment for a preliminary investigation by the courts hold good with 
 reference to the charter of the Coal and Iron Company ? We say 
 that it does not. I have diligently searched the reports of the Com- 
 monwealth of Pennsylvania, and I have found no single instance in 
 which it is claimed that that requirement prevails with reference to a 
 charter obtained subsequent to 1857. I have not been able to find 
 even a doubt on that question. I have no doubt that with respect to 
 a charter obtained before 1857, the requirement may be enforced. 
 The charter of the Reading Railroad Company was obtained in 1833, 
 and, therefore, I am not prepared to say that the legislature has the 
 power to repeal that charter. Many of the supplements to the charter, 
 however, have been obtained since 1857, and as to these I am of 
 the opinion that the legislature does possess the POWER OF 
 REPEAL. 
 
 Prior to 1833, there was but one of the many different kinds of 
 corporations in existence that was regarded as dangerous, aud about 
 which it was required to throw restraints, namely ; the banking corpo- 
 rations or companies formed to carry on the business of discounting 
 or banking. After 1833, another class, the railroad corporations 
 increased and multiplied in great numbers ; and the doctrine to which 
 I have referred having been established by the Courts, that a charter 
 was a contract between the Commonwealth and the Corporators, and as
 
 2S 
 
 such was protected by the Federal Constitution, which provides that no 
 state shall pass a law impairing the obligition of contracts, the people 
 withdrew from the legislature the power to make an// corporation per- 
 petual. They saw that these railroads could aggregate a money power 
 more DANGEROUS TO THE LIBERTIES OF THE PEOPLE, 
 than any corporation doing a banking or discounting business. 
 
 The Constitution already provided that no charter should be granted 
 to a corporation with banking or discounting privileges for a longer 
 period than twenty years, with power in the legislature to alter, revoke, 
 or annul the same. The amendment of 1857 is sweeping in its 
 language, and includes the charters of all corporations, it is as follows : 
 
 The legislature shall have the power to ALTER, REVOKE, OR 
 ANNUL ANY CHARTER of incorporation hereafter con- 
 ferred by any special or general law, whenever in their opinion it may 
 be injurious to the citizens of the Commonwealth, in such manner, 
 however, that no injustice shall be done to the incorporators. 
 
 You will see that all corporations, chartered since 1857, are there- 
 fore tenants at will ; at the will of the people, to be exercised by their 
 agent the legislature; "and, as the power of modification and repeal is 
 thus made a qualifying part of the grant of franchise, the exercise of 
 that power cannot of course impair the obligation of the grant." 
 
 Angell ife Ames on Corporations, sec. 767. 
 
 I claim, therefore, gentlemen, that after 1857 the legislature became 
 judges of the question of an abuse of chartered rights and that 
 whenever in their opinion — and without asking the opinion of 
 the Supreme Court or of any other tribunal — the continuance of a 
 corporation will be injurious, though it may not have abused or mis- 
 used its privileges, they have and they should exercise the power of 
 applying a remedy for the injury. 
 
 Senator Rutan : The section just read is in the new Constitution. 
 
 Gen. Lane : Yes sir; it is there without alteration. The convention 
 were of opinion that they could not better it, and left it substantially, 
 if not entirely, as it was. 
 
 The Charter of the Laurel Run Improvement Company having been 
 obtained in 1871, and this amendment to the Constitution having been 
 made in 1857, the whole question is with the legislature; and, when- 
 ever that body is of opinion that it is injurious to continue in the 
 Reading Railroad Company the power to mine and sell coal, it may and 
 should of right repeal, alter, or amend that power.
 
 29 
 
 Now, gentlemen, right here let me put this question to you. I know 
 that under the new Constitution you could not pass this charter of the 
 Coal and Iron Company, but supposing you were there with the 
 powers you possessed in 1871, and the legislature was asked to pass 
 this charter as the charter of the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and 
 Iron Company, to be used, owned and controlled by the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Railroad Company — would you vote to pass it ? I take 
 it that IT WOULD NOT HAVE THE GHOST OF A CHANCE. 
 And I do not believe it would have had the ghost of a chance of 
 passing in 1871, if the Railroad Company had come before you in a 
 straightforward way and " faced the music," so to speak. I believe 
 that if this corporation had applied for the passage of the charter of 
 the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company in 1871, there 
 would have been such a storm of popular indignation, that no legisla- 
 ture would have ever dared to pass it. The best argument that I can 
 make in support of that proposition, is the fact that they did not go 
 there and ask for a charter for the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and 
 Iron Company, but for a charter for the LAUREL RUN IMPROVE- 
 MENT COMPANY, which name they afterwards had changed by the 
 court under an act of assembly. 
 
 Senator Rutan : I am sorry to state that I was there and voted for 
 it with the understanding that the Reading Railroad Company was to 
 have the charter. 
 
 Mr. Gowen : There was a very bitter speech made against it for that 
 reason alone. 
 
 Senator Rutan : It passed almost unanimously in the senate. 
 
 • Gen. Lane: Well, of course I will not have any controversy with the 
 senator ; and, if I had understood the fact to be as he has stated it, I 
 would not have alluded to the subject. 
 
 Senator Rutan : I only mentioned the fact because I wanted it to be 
 known. 
 
 Senator Waream (to Gen. Lane): You do not propose to ask him 
 whether he would vote for it now ? 
 
 Gen. Lane : I do not propose to interrogate the senator at this time. 
 
 Senator Rutan : There are one or two others here who voted for the 
 bill with the understanding that it was for the benefit of the Reading 
 Railroad Company. I will say this, that AT THAT TIME I 
 KNEW VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE COAL BUSINESS.
 
 30 
 
 Gen. Lane: The senator says he knew very little of the coal business 
 at that time. Well, then I may say that, with the knowledge the 
 gentleman now has, if the application was now made, he at least would 
 not vote to give to the Philadelphia and Heading Railroad Company the 
 immense power, not for good but for evil, that it now holds. 
 
 Senator Rutan: I THINK THAT IS VERY LIKELY. 
 
 Gen. Lane: Then, gentlemen, if you would not give it to them now, 
 why not take it away? If you would not now grant the power, it is 
 because you know that that power is hurting somebody, THAT IT IS 
 INJURING THE PEOPLE. The Constitution provides that no 
 injury shall be done to the corporators and, I take it, that for the sake 
 of a few thousand dollars or because of the investment of a few hun- 
 dred-thousand dollars, the legislature ought not to stand still and see 
 any class of people suffer, as we know the people are suffering under 
 this monopoly. 
 
 On this question THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN in advance of 
 this investigation, the power that makes and unmakes courts and legisla- 
 tures have said in the new Constitution of 1873: — 
 
 " No incorporated company doing the business of a common carrier 
 shall, directly or indirectly, prosecute or engage in mining or manu- 
 facturing articles for transportation over its works ;" and while there may 
 be a doubt whether this new Constitution is the law of corporations 
 chartered before its adoption ; that it speaks the will of the people, that 
 it is a letter of instruction to their agent the legislature, there can be no 
 doubt ; and when it is remembered that the most popular part of the 
 new Constitution was the article on railroads, including the section just 
 quoted, that that article caused the people to adopt the whole instrument 
 by an almost unanimous vote, this letter of instruction will be more im- 
 pressive, will not be overlooked or neglected. 
 
 I know that the QUESTION OF VESTED RIGHTS on the part 
 of corporations is one of a very delicate nature, and yet the vested rights 
 of individuals, your and my vested rights, are ended within a very few 
 years. We have not the privilege, as has a corporation, of handing 
 down our hinds and possessions from generation to generation; in the 
 second generation they are divided ; and I hold that there is no good 
 reason why the lands of this company should not be settled by a trustee, 
 as are yours and mine. 
 
 We have introduced some testimony to show, or at least having a 
 tendency to show, the effect of lodging this immense power in these two
 
 corporations. It appears that the state of affairs now existing is very 
 different from that which existed in 1871-72. We called quite a num- 
 ber of the retail coal dealers to the stand and showed you conclusively 
 that in 1872 they were receiving from this mad all the facilities and 
 accommodations which their business required, and that after that they 
 were very much annoyed, one of the principal sources of annoyance 
 being that they got SHORT WEIGHTS. Commencing by showing the 
 manner of weighing coal at the mines, we produced a witness who testi- 
 tified as to how the Reading Railroad Company weighed its coal in the 
 scales at Frackville. That witness testified that the coal passed over the 
 scales at from five to ten miles an hour, that the weigh-master took the 
 weight while it was in motion, and that he had frequently seen cars consigned 
 to different consignees weighed at the same time. He stated that he saw 
 his own coal on the scales being weighed while coal for other consignees 
 was on the scales; that when his coal arrived at his yard in Philadel- 
 phia, it was light. You will bear in mind, gentlemen, that that was the 
 only witness on the point ; and it was the easiest matter in the world to 
 contradict that witness if what he said was not true. But when the 
 weigh-master at Frackville came upon the stand, there was nut a single 
 question asked him by the other side, other than questions such as 
 would be asked of any school-boy. " Did'nt I tell you to do your duty? " 
 "Yes." "Did'nt you do your duty?" "Yes." " If I had told you to 
 do anything wrong, would you have dune it?" "No." "Did I tell 
 you to do anything wrong?" "No." Of course I do not wish to 
 speak disrespectfully of the counsel fur the companies, and will be un- 
 derstood simply as criticising the style of the questions put by him. 
 We introduced other witnesses, however, to show that in 1873-7-4, 
 the weights were materially short. We introduced witnesses, who 
 stated that they had been driven out of the business on account 
 of short weights. We proved by all of the witnesses that the weights 
 were uniformly short and, by one or two witnesses, that the weights 
 ran ten per cent, short. We have introduced testimony showing that 
 short weights were uniformly given by this Railroad Company since 
 1872. If the committee had given me the time, I would have gone 
 over the testimony and shown you the extent and character of these 
 shortages, as testified to by the witnesses, but, under the spur which 
 you have been applying to me, I have not had the time that would 
 have been requisite to enable me to do this, and am therefore obliged 
 to state the testimony merely from my general recollection of it.
 
 32 
 
 This matter of short weights constituted a grievance, an annoyance 
 and an injury; and the object in presenting the testimony in regard 
 to it was principally to show you the manner in which the Beading 
 Railroad Company could exercise the power it possessed over the 
 business of the coal trade. In almost every case where short weights 
 were found, the claim of short weights was made ; and, as I remember 
 the testimony, in no instance did the matter receive from the Railroad 
 Company any notice other than a letter that they would look into the 
 matter, would examine it and would see about it. They would trace it 
 down so far as to be able to say that they had examined the cars and 
 had not found them broken, or that the bottoms were not out of them, 
 and that was the end of it. An affidavit was sent to the company that 
 we had bought the coal and found it short and, as you remember, gentle- 
 men, the affidavit in that case was lost, and that was the end of it. 
 These short- weights continued during the years 1873 and 1874. Every 
 time that a dealer could find the opportunity, whenever he found his 
 bins empty, he would weigh the coal ; the result showing uniformly in 
 every instance a shortage. He would then make complaint to the Rail- 
 road Company as a common carrier, and the matter would end without 
 any particular attention being paid to it; at all events, nothing would 
 come of it. Rut, finally, Mr. Hallowell, one of the witnesses, who was 
 directed to have his car re-weighed, took it out and ran it over a car 
 scale; and it weighed more the second time than it weighed before. 
 Now Mr. Hallowell again re-weighed the coal and found that the car 
 was not full, that it was short some two tons, as I now remember the 
 testimony. He still made complaint, but no allowance was made. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, this matter of short weights appears to you to be a very 
 small matter, but it was a very serious matter to some of these men who 
 retailed coal. You will remember that many of these men were very 
 poor; they were small dealers, with 1500 or 2000 tons a year, men 
 who had other business during part of the year and who, during the 
 winter time, sought to earn a living for themselves and their families by 
 retailing coal, but were driven out of business by short-weights. That, 
 however, was not the question with us. The question with us and the 
 point at issue was, how could the Reading Railroad Company afford to 
 treat its customers in this way? It could not afford to do it in 1871 ; it 
 DID NOT ATTEMPT TO DO IT IN 1871. Here was the COM- 
 PETITION of the Schuylkill Canal, the Lehigh Valley and the North 
 Pennsylvania Railroads; and if systematic complaints of that kind had
 
 33 
 
 been made against the Reading Railroad as a common carrier, it would 
 have lost its tonnage and lost the means of paying its expenses and its 
 dividends. To guard against the possibility of any complaints of that 
 kind, to take that care of its customers that would result in giving to 
 it the greatest possible amount of tonnage, to eucourage them, as Mr. 
 Rothermel expressed it, in " scratching around to hunt up more tonnage 
 for it," it put on the five per cent. ; and throughout the existence of 
 that five per cent, arrangement there was no complaint, and there could 
 be no complaint. But in 1873 the whole condition of things was 
 changed; for then, if these gentlemen did withdraw their custom, the 
 Coal and Iron Company, this auxiliary company, would furnish tonnage 
 for the railroad company; it would get the same amount of tonnage 
 that the railroad would get if these gentlemen were to continue to 
 "scratch around" to get tonnage for it, In addition to that, the railroad 
 had the opportunity of selling its own coal. That was the cause of the 
 complaint, that by this franchise, this power given to it by the common- 
 wealth of Pennsylvania, it was put in a position not only to strike down 
 the middlemen, and hold them down when it got them down, but to 
 strike down the retail dealer and HOLD HIM DOWN WHEN IT 
 GOT HIM DOWN. Now, you take away this auxiliary company, 
 and the Reading Railroad Company is bound to hunt for tonnage, to 
 take care of its customers, and to have all these men "scratching 
 around" and getting tonnage for it ; then it will protect its customers. Well, 
 now, gentlemen, what was the answer made to this complaint? I ask 
 you to pay particular attention to this. The last application that I now 
 have in my mind that was made to have this matter of short weights 
 rectified, was made to J. Lowrie Bell, the General Freight Agent, who 
 was a witness and testified before you. He answered in this language 
 (it is in the testimony) : " We do not think a fair test can be made other 
 than by passing the car with contents OVER A TRACK SCALE, 
 and on that account would be unwilling to accept the weights ascer- 
 tained by hauling in carts from car to wagon scales." That was the 
 answer, gentlemen, that. you cannot make a fair test by weighing coal 
 which has been hauled from the car to the scale, that any test so made 
 is uufair. The only way to do is to take the coal while in bulk and 
 pass it over the scales, and any other way is unfair, says Mr. Bell. 
 And after they had produced that statement in evidence, it is marvelous 
 that they resorted to any other way of testing weight than by running 
 the cart, while the coal was in bulk, over the scale and weighing it.
 
 34 
 
 But, gentlemen, did they resort to this "fair test" to which they de- 
 manded we should subject them? Why the Act of 1871, providing for 
 the weighing of coal, gave to this Reading Railroad, this great corpora- 
 tion, with its millions and millions of dollars, with its POWER TO 
 CRUSH ANY MAN whom it desires to crush, and there is no doubt, 
 gentlemen, but that it can crush any one man when it tries, it gave this 
 corporation the power to go to the coal yard of an individual and buy 
 a ton of coal and then say, "now, Mr. Hancock, that coal is mine; I 
 am going to take it to a scale and see if it is full weight," THEY 
 DID NOT WEIGH IT IN BULK as their own coal had been 
 weighed, but they employed men for a specific purpose. What was 
 that purpose? It was to find short weights. They paid these men for 
 this purpose, and paid them for all the coal that went into their cellars. 
 Now you saw those men, and do you suppose any of them would return 
 to the Reading Railroad Company with the report that they did not 
 find any short weights, in other words, that the railroad company only 
 were the scoundrels? Not a bit of it. They performed their duty well. 
 And a singular coincidence in connection with this testimony was that 
 THE AMOUNT OF SHORTAGE IN EACH INSTANCE COR- 
 RESPONDED WITH THE DAMAGING EFFECT WITH 
 WHICH THE DEALER HAD TESTIFIED AGAINST THE 
 RAILROAD. Where a witness had not been very damaging to the 
 company, the long weights loomed up, but those of the witnesses who 
 testified with the greatest effect against the railroad, were the ones who 
 caught it the worst in return. Our friend Spooner fared the worst, 
 because he had been the hardest upon the company ; he was taken in 
 hand by a detective in person, his case could not be safely turned 
 over to one of the hired emissaries. I say that the men who 
 did this work were employed for a specific purpose, that of finding 
 short weights. They were either employees of the railroad, or persons 
 employed by detectives, or were themselves detectives; and when 
 I have said that, I have said all that I propose to say on that matter. 
 My object is mainly to call your attention to the fact that the test which 
 they applied was not that fair test of weighing in bulk spoken of by 
 J. Lowrie Bell ! We have proved by the witnesses that this was a light 
 coal, that is, that it is what is known as the Lykens Valley Coal, a coal 
 that is much lighter in weight than the Lehigh Coal, and consequently 
 of much larger bulk. In passing some eight or nine squares from the 
 place of purchase to the place of delivery, it is probable that a very
 
 35 
 
 considerable portion of it would fall off the cart. After being conveyed 
 to a certain point, it was dumped upon the sidewalk and finally gathered 
 up and deposited in a cellar, where it lay until gathered up into bags to 
 be weighed by these gentlemen (undoubtedly they discharged their 
 duty while watching it), who WERE EMPLOYED TO FIND 
 SHORT WEIGHT. Mr. Cheesman the weigher, says he weighed the 
 Cual in every instance, but the fact soon became apparent that this man 
 whom you expected to see with his parchment spread out before you, 
 was simply employed to do his work ; and when we found one or two 
 men who were perfectly honest and who had not been employed to do 
 this work— Mr. Tully, of Gerinantowo, was I think the name of one of 
 t l lellJ — we find a different version of the story. Mr. Tully says, that 
 after the weigher left he (Tully) went out and picked up in the 
 cellar, where the coal had lain, two scuttlesfull of coal notwithstanding 
 Mr. Cheesman certified and testified that all the coal was weighed. 
 
 Now, nut only was the test established by the railroad AN UNFAIR 
 TEST, but it failed to prove anything. It was not introduced to con- 
 tradict our testimony; it did not contradict it; if anything, IT ESTAB- 
 LISHED OUR TESTIMONY. Of course if the scales of the 
 retailers weighed light, the tendency of that fact was to increase the 
 light weight of the railroad ; every one can see that. If a four ton car 
 is delivered into the yard, and it falls short half a ton by scales which 
 give light weight, and then the balance is weighed out by scales which 
 give short weight, this only serves to increase the short weights of the 
 Reading Railroad Company. It does not disprove the existence of, but 
 ouly increases short weights. 
 
 But are the scales of the railroad correct — have they that element of 
 certainty in measurement from which there can be no escape? Are the 
 weighte of the man who goes around every month and tests the scales 
 always correct? Why, we can refer to the weights produced by the 
 gentlemen themselves, and prove conclusively that they are not correct. 
 Take the exhibit made by the company of the amount of coal that was 
 received in the company's yard, at Ninth and Berks streets. They state 
 that they received 80,912 tons and had an excess of 103 tons. They 
 received at their Germantown yard only 18,232 tons and had an excess 
 of 8-10 tons. At the Ninth and Berks streets yard, the excess was less 
 than &'s of one per cent. The excess at the Germantown yard was 
 four and , 6 s per cent. Had the excess at the Ninth and Berks streets 
 yard, been as large as it was at the other yards, it would have been
 
 36 
 
 3,702 tons instead of 103 tons, and if the weights at the mines were 
 correct, the people of Germantown paid for 841) tons of coal that they 
 did not get. They make mistakes, and that faet is conclusive that their 
 scales are not as accurate as they have attempted to show you that they 
 arc. They show you that their shippers at Richmond have received 
 more than they shipped, but the weights are theirs in both instances; 
 and the fact that they sent out more than they received, is an evidence 
 that Til KIR SCALES DO NOT WEIGH ACCURATELY, but 
 what was the object on the part of these corporations in introducing this 
 evidence? Certainly not to disprove any evidence against them; it had 
 no such tendency. The motive is apparent, the object was to satisfy 
 you that there is no safety to the people but in turning over all 
 this business to corporations ; that there is no power in the legislature 
 to make laws ; no personal integrity in the people ; no public sentiment 
 sufficiently strong to guard the people, to protect one class of the com- 
 munity from the other class of the community ; but turn all this business 
 over to corporations, and they will do justice and deal fairly. When in 
 the history of the world was power obtained by any other argument? 
 IT HAS EVER BEEN THE PLEA TO OBTAIN POWER FOR 
 THE FEW, that the people could not take care of themselves ; that 
 power in the leaders was necessary for the care and protection of the 
 people. Are you ready to make this concession? Are you ready to 
 report THAT THE PEOPLE CANNOT BE TRUSTED? Are 
 you ready to say that this government of the people, by the people, for 
 the people, is a mistake; and that by placing power in the hands of one 
 or six men, the happiness and prosperity of the community will be 
 more secure? 
 
 Now, gentlemen, there is one other matter to which we call your 
 attention; and that is to the DETENTION OF CARS. We showed 
 you that the witnesses whom we produced, representative men of their 
 class, were greatly annoyed by the detention of their cars, and that. 
 WHILE THE READING COAL AND IRON COMPANY WERE 
 RECEIVING- THEIR COAL REGULARLY AND CONSTANT- 
 LY, THE RETAIL DEALERS AND FACTORS WERE NOT 
 RECEIVING- THEIRS; that their yards were entirely empty; that 
 they could not get coal, and that they were greatly annoyed. Now, 
 gentlemen, in answer to that, the Coal and Iron Company say, 'why 
 we keep books; we have the advantage of you; you did not keep a 
 minute of this thing, but we did ; we have you now and we will bring
 
 37 
 
 you down." They then go over a period of two years and then sum up 
 the total of all the ears that the consignee received in that period of 
 two years, and then they sum up the total of hours that those cars were 
 out, and they strike a balance and show an average. But, gentlemen, 
 that does not answer the charge. Our complaint was that WHEN 
 WE W ANTED CARS WE COULD NOT GET THEM, and this 
 they have not attempted to answer. I have run over the paper pre- 
 sented by the company, for the purpose of showing an average of one 
 day and thirteen hours, and I will give you, just as presented by the 
 company, the figures which show this complaint to have been well 
 founded. 
 
 You will remember the testimony was. that if the cars were loaded, 
 for instance, on to-day, they ought to be delivered on to-morrow or 
 within twenty-four hours; but. in citing these periods of detention. I 
 will confine myself to those only which exceed five days in length. 
 
 Senator Rutan: Forty-eight hours, at the outside, was the limit. 
 
 Gen. Lane: Yes; the limit was forty -eight hours, at the outside. 
 
 Branson & Brother had 26 cars that were detained from five to 
 eleven days. 
 
 J. B. Hancock & Co., 2(3 cars, from five to seventeen days out. 
 
 Mr. Conrad, 57 " " " " twenty-five " " 
 
 Mr. Spooner, 49 " "• " " twenty-six " " 
 
 Mr. Fleck, 14 " " " " ten 
 
 Mr. Kepner, 61 " " " " twenty-six " " 
 
 You will remember, gentlemen, that in passing over the road, we took 
 some note of the location of these yards. Mr. Kepners yard is above 
 that of the Coal and Iron Company, and therefore that blockade on 
 Ninth street, of which he spoke, could not affect his yard, yet he had 
 sixty-one cars out from five to twenty-six days. And you will bear in 
 mind here, that these complaints were made at times when these dealers 
 had no coal, and when the Reading Coal and Iron Company, whose 
 yards were located in their immediate vicinity, had all the coal they 
 wanted and were receiving continually. 
 
 Wagner, Conrad & Singerly had sixty cars out from five to thirty- 
 three days. Roberts & Brother, whose yard was at Geraiantown and 
 whose cars did not come over the Ninth street road at all, had twenty- 
 five cars out from five to thirty-one days. Chapman & Gaskill had 
 sixty-two cars out from five to twenty-six days. Mr. Hallowell had 
 twenty-nine cars out from five to twenty-five days.
 
 38 
 
 Now, gentlemen of the committee, suppose that one of these coal 
 dealers had entered into a contract with one of you. the requisite security 
 being given, for supplying you with coal upon certain terms, and that 
 after having during the summer months supplied you promptly, and 
 perhaps within an hour after your calling upon him. he abruptly stops 
 delivering you coal in the month of January. 1 875. 
 
 You order your coal as usual, and he promises to attend to it: you go 
 to him again, and tell him that your bins are empty and you must have 
 coal; he answers: I will look after it. You go again and again, and 
 get the same answer; you wait on and suffer on. you remember how 
 promptly your coal was delivered in August, and know that you and 
 your family are freezing in winter ; the cold month of January passes 
 and you get no relief; you go to him, conscious of an injury, you 
 denounce him as an impostor and a cheat, when all at once he turns 
 upon you to convince you that he is the injured individual; that he has 
 kept the date of each of your orders, and the number of tons you 
 ordered; he has prepared AN AVERAGE, and during the whole year 
 your coal was delivered in an average of twenty-four hours, and then, 
 oentlemen. when von turn round and find that this man controls all the 
 avenues, and that all your coal must come from him, that from his 
 power there is no escape, you must feel that it is dangerous to place such 
 great power in the hands of one man, and that that power has been 
 grossly abused. 
 
 As ridiculous as this may appear, such is the answer made by these 
 corporations ; they show you that for two years the coal of these gentle- 
 men has been detained on an AVERAGE one day and thirteen hours. 
 
 But would they dare to give such an answer if they were common 
 carriers alone? the question is not one of average: it is whether this 
 company is doing its duty, or whether it is abusing its franchises and 
 refusing to do its duty ; whether it is taking care of the public, or 
 whether it is abusing the public. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, during this investigation, we passed together over 
 this southern coal field, the Schuylkill region ; and after we had gone 
 over it we knew a great deal more about mining coal than we knew 
 before we visited it; but I have no doubt that when you saw the men 
 of that region engaged at their daily avocations as miners; when you 
 saw them going down and coming up from their work in the mines, the 
 thought suggested itself to your minds — WHAT WILL THESE 
 MEN BE TEN, FIFTEEN OR TWENTY YEARS HENCE?
 
 39 
 
 when we stood by the side of the breaker and saw the little boy picking 
 out the slate, we asked ourselves, " what effect upon these men and these 
 boys will the policy now pursued have, when all these lands and mines 
 are owned and controlled by corporations; how will it affect these men? 
 the pride of every American to own his home cannot stimulate them ; 
 the hope of some day owning a mine has been blasted by this grant of 
 franchise, which enabled a corporation to take all and hold it forever; 
 doomed all their lives to be employees, THE DOORS OF PROMO- 
 TION ARE FOREVER CLOSED to all these twenty, thirty, or forty- 
 thousand men, and to the thousands that will come after them ; a 
 condition of things that you, gentlemen, as law-givers cannot contemplate 
 with other than feelings of alarm; who will be benefited, certainly not 
 the people. These grants of franchise to these corporations given to 
 them for public good are to be used to crush the people ; the bond-holder 
 may get his dividend, but the people must suffer that he may get it. 
 THE DEAD WEIGHT OF POWER HAS OPPRESSED AND 
 DESTROYED EVERY INDIVIDUAL AMBITION, and though 
 this power may produce some specific astonishing effects, it saps the life ; 
 it may build ships and roail roads, but it will not produce healthy, happy 
 homes, or contented people. 
 
 While the power is in the rail road to fix the charge for freights at 
 any price it desires ,no limit but the will of the railroad company, — 
 1 L\ F. Smith, 310-15 P. F. Smith, 210-242— and the power is m 
 the Coal and Iron Company to fix the price of coal at Port Carbon at 
 any price it desires, these two corporations can compel any private 
 operator to accept the terms or adopt the plans of the combination ; they 
 may put the freight up to six dollars or more a ton, and put the coal 
 down to one dollar and a half or less at Port Carbon, and while COM- 
 PELLING EVERY OTHER OPERATOR TO STOP, or go on at a 
 loss, these two corporations can work at a profit; what they lose on coal, 
 they can more than make up on freights ; they can fix the prices to suit 
 themselves and the people are powerless; THE COMBINATIONS 
 HAA r E DESTROYED COMPETITION. Such power in a corpora- 
 tion is a reproach to the State; to give such power is an ASSAULT 
 UPON THE LIBERTIES OF THE PEOPLE! to say that it can 
 continue, that the people will, and must submit, is a reflection upon their 
 intelligence, and a defiance of their'power. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, in consequence of the very short time you have 
 allowed the counsel in this case, having brought us here within a very few
 
 40 
 
 days after the close of the testimony and without our having an oppor- 
 tunity to see the testimony, I have gone over the matter as rapidly 
 as was possible, and, to my mind, very unsatisfactorily. Notwithstanding 
 this, I have no doubt, gentlemen, that I have demonstrated to your 
 satisfaction that this company has not the legal power to do what it 
 is doing; that the charter upon which it has acted is invalid, and that, 
 if valid, it has abused and misused its franchise, and that the power to 
 apply the remedy rests with you independently of the courts. 
 
 Senator Rutan : The remedy, as I understand you, is to repeal the 
 charter of the Coal and Iron Company? 
 
 Gen. Lane: Yes, sir; if the legislature desires to repeal the charter, 
 the right to exercise the repealing power rests entirely with that body. 
 I hold that it should at once APPLY THE REMEDY RY REPEAL- 
 ING THE CHARTER OF THE PHILADELPHIA AND 
 READING COAL AND IRON COMPANY. AND AUTHORI- 
 ZING THE GOVERNOR TO APPOINT TRUSTEES TO DIS- 
 TRIBUTE THE ESTATE. 
 
 Senator Rutan : You do not mean the charter of the Railroad Co. ? 
 
 Gen. Lane: I do not mean the charter of the Railroad Co.; we will 
 ask the Court to attend to that.
 
 ARGUMENT 
 
 SILAS W. PETTIT, Esq., 
 
 OF PHILADELPHIA, 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 Joint Committee of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, ap- 
 pointed to inquire into the affairs of the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Coal and Iron Company and the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Com- 
 pany, on July 31st, 1875, 
 
 IN REPLY TO THE ARGUMENT OF 
 
 FRANKLIN B. GOWEN, Esq., 
 
 President of said Companies. 
 
 REPORTED KY 
 
 JOSEPH I. GILBERT.
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee : — I 
 congratulate you upon now arriving at almost the finality of the long 
 investigation which you have made and which, since the adjournment 
 of the Legislature, has occupied so much of your time at such a 
 serious inconvenience to yourselves. 
 
 The gentleman representing the Railroad Company and the Coal and 
 Iron Company has well divided the case into two heads — first, a history 
 or general view of tin Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, 
 on the one hand; and secondly, the questions raised by the testimony 
 which we have presented before you, on the other. Under the first 
 head, the gentleman was peculiarly and fully qualified to speak. He 
 not only had the knowledge to be derived from the testimony and the 
 exhibits, but he was thoroughly acquainted with the whole subject 
 from having for fifteen years made this particular pursuit of the 
 mining, selling and transporting of coal a matter of constant study. 
 
 With reference to the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, 
 which you, gentlemen, were appointed to investigate, we would say, in 
 commencing this argument, that at no time since this investigation 
 began was there, on our part, any thought of attacking the personal 
 or official integrity of any officer of that company. On the contrary, 
 so far as that is concerned, we will bear cheerful testimony to the fact 
 that everything that has been so well and eloquently said on that 
 score by my friend on the other side is true, and perhaps even less 
 than true. 
 
 The Philadelphia and Heading Railroad Company was chartered in 
 1833, and in 1838, by virtue of an amendment to its charter its road 
 was extended, and it was authorized to lay its tracks to the borough of 
 Pottsville, to which point it was opened for business'in 1842, having 
 then a length of ninety-three miles. THIS CORPORATION, from 
 that modest commencement, has gradually extended itself, not, as I 
 take it, by the building of lines of railway, but BY THE ABSORP- 
 TION OF LINES OF RAILWAY BUILT BY OTHERS; indi- 
 viduals and smaller companies; until now, FROM 93 MILES, it 
 HAS GROWN TO 1,360 MILES, or more than fourteen times its 
 original length — 466 miles of which, or five times the length for 
 which it was originally chartered, are in the Schuylkill coal 
 region alone.
 
 44 
 
 A list of the companies absorbed by it may in this connection be 
 interesting. I quote from the recitals in the last general mortgage for 
 sixty-millions of dollars, made by the Railroad Company on the 1st 
 of July, 1874. 
 
 First they recite their main line from its termini at Port Richmond, 
 to its junction with the Mount Carbon Railroad at a point which is 
 one mile or one and one-half miles on this side of Pottsville. Then 
 follow the Lebanon Valley Branch ; the Lebanon and Tremont 
 Branch ; the Mahanoy and Shamokin Branch ; the Mount Carbon 
 Branch; the Schuylkill and Susquehanna Branch; the Port Kennedy 
 and West Reading Branch ; the Philadelphia, Germantown and Norris- 
 town Branch ; the Chestnut Hill Railroad; the Plymouth Railroad; 
 the Perkiomen and Colebrookdale Railroad; the East Pennsylvania 
 Railroad ; the East Mahanoy Railroad and Little Schuylkill Naviga- 
 tion Railroad and Coal Company ; the Schuylkill Valley Navigation 
 and Railroad Compauy ; the Mill Creek and Mine Hill Navigation and 
 Railroad Company ; the Mine Hill and Schuylkill Haven Railroad ; 
 the Canal and Navigation Works of the President and Managers, of 
 the Schuylkill Navigation Company, the Susquehauna Canal Company, 
 and the Catawissa Railroad ; — all these together comprising l^GOfo 
 miles of single track railroad, besides the two canals, and besides the 
 line of steam colliers. 
 
 Therefore, gentlemen, this corporation which is so modest and un- 
 assuming, this corporation which desires simply to be let alone seems, 
 by the very testimony before you, to have extended itself, not by 
 building roads, but by absorbing those roads which had been built by 
 other people; this "Falcon, tow'ring in her pride of place," about 
 which we have been told, seems to be a most voracious bird and, on 
 closer inspection, I think you will find it to be no falcon at all — but a 
 cormorant. ; 
 
 Now, sirs, having thus extended themselves, having absorbed all the 
 railroads and canals within their reach ; having acquired all this 
 power, you would think they had enough. But, says the gentleman, 
 they still felt not safe, they were still incomplete, there were still other 
 companies and other people in the field, and consequently and as 
 explanatory of this, and as showing the necessity for the Reading 
 Company buyiug coal lands, he told us about the differences between 
 the coal regions, and we were given a statistical comparison of those 
 regions, to show the different degrees of development attained by each,
 
 45 
 
 and how far the Schuylkill region was behind the Wyoming, the 
 Lehigh and the other regions. 
 
 But, gentlemen, your attention was not called to the fact that the 
 difference in the development of the anthracite coal region was mainly 
 due to the greater ease and smaller cost of mining in certain parts of 
 that region, as compared with the other parts. In the Schuylkill 
 region, as you yourselves have been informed by personal inspection, 
 the veins of coal lie almost upright — an angle of seventy degrees is 
 probably the average or perhaps less than the average — while in those 
 other regions the coal lies flatter, and is easier and less expensive to 
 work; besides which the coal from the Lehigh and other regions 
 certainly had in the markets of the country a better reputation, as has 
 already been conceded, than that from the Schuylkill region. 
 
 This very matter of the weigh-bill, alluded to by Mr. Gowen, was a 
 striking example of this disparity. You, gentlemen of the committee, 
 when down in the mines in the Schuylkill region, heard the miners 
 say, I certainly heard them say, that that weigh-bill would not do ior 
 them. They did not want it ; it did not answer their purposes ; it did 
 not answer the purposes of the operators; it was of no use to anybody, 
 so far as that region was concerned ; but it had been asked for and 
 introduced by the representative of one of these other counties, viz: 
 Luzerne, because that very fact, the difference in the lay of the coal 
 measures of the two counties, caused that which was of no benefit for 
 Schuylkill County to be, in the view of the Luzerne County miners, 
 of the highest necessity for their own region. This difference alone, 
 that is, the greater ease and less expense of mining coal in the Lehigh 
 and Wyoming regions, sufficiently explains why those regions have 
 been more developed than the Schuylkill coal fields. 
 
 Now, sirs, if, as alleged by the gentleman, there was danger of those 
 corporations which were operating in Lehigh and Luzerne, encroaching 
 upon the rights of the State of Pennsylvania, or taking away its 
 wealth from it without making any adequate return, the remedy of the 
 gentleman was that which he now proposes to bring before you at the 
 next session of the body which you represent, namely, an application 
 to the legislature. All these companies are subject to the supervision 
 of the legislature, for they all hold valuable rights which they have 
 acquired since the Constitutional amendment of 1858. Most of them 
 have not only substantial amendments to their charters granted since 
 that time, but also hold charters of auxiliary companies bearing the
 
 46 
 
 same relation to them that the Reading Coal and Iron Company bears 
 to the Reading Railroad Company, which have been granted since 
 1858 ; and which are, therefore, as is now substantially conceded by 
 the gentleman representing these companies, entirely within the power 
 of the legislature to amend or repeal, if, in their opinion, such amend- 
 ment or repeal is necessary for the public interests ; and if there was 
 any danger to the people of Pennsylvania, it was the duty of the 
 gentleman to have pointed out that fact to the legislature and to have 
 asked their interference, and not to have assumed that two wrongs 
 make a right, and joined with them himself. He should have pointed 
 out to the legislature that these corporations, which had been incorpo- 
 rated as the servants of the people, had become their masters, and 
 they who at first were suppliants for subscriptions to develop these 
 regions had come to have the controlling power in them. Therefore, 
 so far as that is concerned, any wrong or harm that they could do is 
 alike the wrong or harm which we consider to have been done by the 
 Reading Railroad Company ; and both are equally matters within the 
 control of the legislature. 
 
 The gentleman, however, did not attempt to apply a remedy for the 
 evil. This company thought the matter over and the gentleman 
 became, as he has told you, a convert. Well, we all know that con- 
 verts are ordinarily the most zealous professors ; we all know that they 
 "out-Herod Herod;" we know that usually they take the lead of 
 those very men who have converted them; and this company, as I 
 think I can show you, is no exception to the rule. The region, it is 
 stated as a reason and an excuse for this Reading Company becoming 
 itself a land owner and a miner of coal, needed the aid of corporate 
 enterprise; it is said that, except for its coal measures, Schuylkill 
 County was like the Desert of Sahara. That was so, but the reason 
 or excuse has no application, for the fact was that these coal measures 
 had already been developed and that the whole region was filled with 
 collieries, built, owned and operated by individuals or by small com- 
 panies with mining powers simply. So far as there is any testimony 
 before us, with the single exception of that East Norwegian Shaft, 
 THERE HAS BEEN NOTHING ADDED THERE SINCE THE 
 PERIOD OF THIS GRAND AMALGAMATION BY THE 
 READING RAILROAD COMPANY. Everything that is there, 
 as appears by the evidence, had been there before. The Mahanoy 
 Plane, which was pointed out to us as one of the necessities for an
 
 47 
 
 aggregation of capital, as one of the things that required the inter- 
 position of a large company, had been built years before, and built by 
 one of these identical smaller railroad companies that I have enume- 
 rated to you as having been absorbed by the Reading Company. 
 Everything was then just as it is now. THEREFORE. THERE 
 WAS NO NECESSITY FOR THIS COMBINATION TO COME 
 IN AND DEVELOP THE REGION, THE REGION HAD 
 BEEN DEVELOPED, the railroads had been built and the planes 
 had been built, the shafts and slopes dug, the breakers erected and 
 everything was done necessary for the mining and transportation of 
 coal, and the whole region was in operation and in successful operation. 
 
 But the President of these Reading Companies became, as he says, 
 a convert and in consequence went into the market and bought what 
 has been stated here to be 100,000 acres of land, or one-third of the 
 whole anthracite coal field. I have seen it stated in some of the 
 statistical reports at a considerably larger number, but the statement 
 may have been inaccurate; the number of acres he bought would 
 probably be best known to the gentleman himself. TO ENABLE 
 HIM TO DO THIS, HE APPLIED TO THE LEGISLATURE 
 FOR A CHARTER; and here let me say a word in support of what 
 has been said by my learned friend and colleague in opening this case, 
 in regard to the unconstitutionality of this Act of the Legislature. 
 The charter of the Reading Railroad Company provided, after giving 
 the powers to build a railroad, to establish by-laws, to have a common 
 seal, etc., as follows (this proviso being in the second section of the 
 original act of incorporation) : — 
 
 "Provided, that nothing herein contained shall be construed as in 
 any way giving to the said corporation any banking privileges whatso- 
 ever, or any other liberties, privileges or franchises, but such as may be 
 necessary or incident to the making and maintaining of the said rail- 
 road, and the conveyance of passengers and the transportation of coal 
 and of goods, merchandise and commodities thereon." 
 
 Therefore, their grant of powers was not simply that which is given 
 ordinarily to a railroad company, but they were expressly limited by 
 the charter itself to those powers only which were necessary or inci- 
 dent to the conveyance of their traffic. There was no mere implication 
 as to the limitation of their powers, but that limitation was fully 
 expressed in their charter itself. And here, if I may be permitted, I 
 desire to say a word of personal explanation. It has been said that
 
 48 
 
 in opening this case no allusion was made to this particular point. 
 The explanation of that is very simple. My colleague and myself had 
 been retained in the case only on the day before that on which we ap- 
 peared before you, and I do not know that I had seen at the time I 
 opened this case before you, the charters of the companies — certainly 
 I had had no opportunity to do more than cursorily glance over them 
 — and under these circumstances the oversight occurred. 
 
 Now, with reference to the charge of the unconstitutionality of the 
 powers claimed by this Eailroad Company under the charter they 
 obtained; I call your attention to the fact that the amendment which 
 was made to the Constitution of Pennsylvania in 1864 expressly 
 provides : — 
 
 " No bill shall be passed by the Legislature containing more than 
 one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in the title, except appro- 
 priation bills." 
 
 The charter of the Coal and Iron Company, which is an act entitled 
 " An act to incorporate the Laurel Run Improvement Company," 
 CONTAINS TWO SUBJECTS, AND IS THEREFORE RE- 
 PUGNANT TO THIS CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITION. 
 The gentleman representing the other side says, that this question has 
 been passed upon and decided in his favor. Where, I ask, has it been 
 so passed upon and decided ? What case cited before you decided it ? 
 The case of Commonwealth vs. Greene, 8, P. F. Smith, 226, which 
 was cited on the other side, was the case of the establishment of a 
 criminal court in Schuylkill, Dauphin and Lebanon Counties, and pro- 
 vided, in addition to the establishment of the court, who should be the 
 judge and who should be the clerk, and how the jurors should be 
 drawn, and contained various other provisions, every one of which were 
 necessarily incident to the establishment and the carrying on of the 
 criminal court. Therefore, of course those subjects that were therein 
 contained were, all of them, covered by the title of the act. When 
 you see by the title of an act that it is an act to establish a criminal 
 court, you very naturally look into the body of the act for some pro- 
 vision by which that criminal court can be carried on and conducted 
 after it has been established. The case of Church Street, in 4, P. F. 
 Smith, page 353, was cited. An examination of the statute under 
 consideration in that case, shows that it was an amendment to an act 
 authorizing the opening of a road; and as the Constitution of the 
 State eiuce 1700, and every Constitution that the Commonwealth of
 
 49 
 
 Pennsylvania ever had, has provided that damages should be paid wher- 
 ever land was taken for public use for streets or highways ; the supple- 
 ment to the act simply covered the defect in the original act, which had 
 not provided for the payment of the damages caused by the opening of the 
 street, and provided that damages should be paid; but the obligation 
 to pay these damages was necessarily implied without the supplement 
 aud the street could not be opened until they were paid. The case of 
 Blood vs. Mercelliott, 3, P. F. Smith, 391, was that of the establish- 
 ment of Forest County out of some other counties, and there the act 
 provided, besides establishing the boundaries of the new county, where 
 should be the County seat, and the County Commissioners were 
 authorized to erect the county buildings there. Well, now, that of 
 itself was a necessary and cognate subject to the title of the act. 
 Certainly, in laying out the new county, it was perfectly proper to 
 provide where the new county seat should be, and it was necessary to 
 make some provisions for the erection of the county buildings at that 
 place ; and, although a proper exercise of power on the part of the 
 legislature, and sufficiently mentioned in the title as it was, it has been 
 referred to by the present Chief Justice of our State as being on the 
 very border line of the cases upon the point, whether or not more 
 than one subject was included and whether or uot the title sufficiently 
 indicated the contents of the act. But, the proper way in which to 
 look at the question, is to consider the old law, the mischief and the 
 remedy. The old law, the law as it stood before the adoption of the 
 Constitutional amendment was, that one act might cover anything, and 
 the title of an act of the legislature was no indication of its contents 
 and, as those ot you, gentlemeu, who are lawyers well know, the very 
 act which effected a complete revolution in the possession of property 
 by a married woman in Pennsylvania — I mean the act of 1848 — was 
 an act that was entitled, "An act to incorporate the LeRaysville 
 Phalanx," (a militia company somewhere in the interior of the state) 
 "and for other purposes." The title of the act was no indication 
 whatever of its contents. Neither the legislature nor the people had 
 notice by the title of what was contained therein. To correct this 
 practice, the amendment to the Constitution ,was passed, and it had a 
 double purpose, namely, that not only the legislature that passed the 
 bill should know what was in it by its title, but, that the people should 
 know, when the titles of acts were published, what the contents of 
 those acts were and what their object was. In the case of this Laurel
 
 50 
 
 Run Company, it is said that the ohject of the act was known to the 
 legislature; it was so argued and stated upon the floor here; but the 
 fact remains that the title of the act was no notice to the people. 
 Indeed, that it was no notice to the public has been assumed by the 
 other side and we have been asked, " why, would you, if you had been 
 in our places, have sent notice of your purpose to the other side?" 
 Now, sirs, let me call your attention to this. The charter of the 
 Reading Railroad Company provided, as you have seen, that the 
 powers of that company should be limited to those necessary for the 
 maintaining of their railroad and the transportation of goods, passen- 
 gers and merchandise thereon. This act to incorporate the Laurel 
 Run Improvement Company, after incorporating that company, pro- 
 vides that " it shall be lawful for the President and Directors of said 
 company to subscribe for or purchase the lands or stock of any other 
 incorporated company in the State of Pennsylvania, and for any rail- 
 road or mining company existing under the laws of this state, to 
 subscribe for or purchase the stock, or to purchase or guarantee the 
 bonds of the company hereby incorporated." It was perfectly proper 
 that in the act to incorporate the Laurel Run Improvement Company, 
 the Laurel Run Improvement Company should be empowered to 
 receive subscriptions from other companies, or make subscriptions to 
 other companies, but, to authorize the Reading Railroad Company to 
 subscribe for its stock, more than that was required. An express 
 legislative authority to the Reading Railroad Company to do this was 
 absolutely necessary. It was not the case of an individual making a 
 subscription, because individuals need no legislative authorization to 
 enable them to deal with their property as they choose, but a corpora- 
 tion does need this. It has been held time and time again, it has been 
 held so often, that it is matter of law known to every business man in 
 our commonwealth, that corporations have no powers except those 
 which are expressly given to them ; there is for them no such thing as 
 a power by implication. Chief Justice Black, in his nervous and 
 forcible language, thus expresses the rule: "In the construction of a 
 charter, to be in doubt is to be resolved, and every resolution which 
 springs i'rom doubt is against the corporation. If the usefulness of 
 the company would be increased by extending its privileges, let the 
 legislature see to it, but remember that nothing but plain English 
 words will do it." 
 
 Pennsylvania Railroad vs. Canal Commissioners — 9 Harris 22.
 
 51 
 
 Now, it was possible in the act to incorporate the Laurel Run 
 Improvement Company, to authorize the Laurel Run Improvement 
 Company to subscribe for the shares of other companies; that was a 
 power which was cognate and relative to its own incorporation ; but 
 to authorize another company to subscribe to it required an additional 
 act authorizing that other company so to do, inasmuch as it was a 
 grant of power to another corporation. Therefore I say this act 
 contains two subjects: First — that it authorizes the Laurel Run 
 Company to exercise its numerous corporate privileges ; second — that 
 it authorized other companies to subscribe for and purchase its stock. 
 And I say, that in order to make this authority to subscribe to the 
 stock of the Laurel Run Company available to the Reading Railroad 
 Company, and to enable it to get the benefit of this act, it was 
 necessary to legislate expressly for that purpose, and expressly give 
 that power to the Reading Railroad Company. 
 
 Seeing this difficulty, the gentleman undertook to say that the words 
 " and it shall be lawful * * * * for any railroad or mining company, 
 existing under the laws of this state, to subscribe for or purchase the 
 stock, or guarantee the bonds of the company hereby incorporated," 
 were surplusage and unnecessary, but it is too plain to need argument, 
 that if those words had been omitted, he would have had nothing to 
 stand upon, and there would have been no authority of any kind for 
 the Reading Railroad Company to subscribe for or purchase the stock 
 of the Reading Coal and Iron Company. 
 
 NOW, LET THE GENTLEMAN TAKE EITHER HORN OF THE DILEMMA: 
 Either this was an act to incorporate the Laurel Run Improvement 
 Company, and to authorize the Reading Railroad Company to own its 
 stock — in which case it contained two subjects, and teas unconstitutional 
 for that reason — or it was an act to enable the Reading Railroad 
 Company to mine and sell Coal, in the name of the Laurel Run 
 Improvement Company — in which case the title of the Act not only did 
 not " clearly express" the object of it, but did not express the object of it 
 at all. Either this was an act to authorize two things to be done, or 
 it was an act with but one purpose and one object, in which case that 
 purpose and that object were not expressed in the title of the Act, as 
 is required by the Constitution of the State. 
 
 Now this is no matter simply of mere individual opinion; it has been 
 passed upon judicially. The gentleman was right perhaps when he 
 said that there had been various decisions upon it, and that the consti-
 
 52 
 
 tutional provision had been sometimes held to be a directory provision 
 only. An examination of the authorities collected in Cooley on Con- 
 stitutional Limitations, pp. 451 to 461, I think; I cite from memory; 
 shows that this constitutional provision has been adopted in many of 
 the States of the Union and, in some of them, a long time ago; that 
 at first, viz: prior to 1864-5, it was held sometimes that it was a 
 directory provision only, and therefore could be disregarded if the 
 Legislature so pleased; and wherever that was held, the Legislature 
 almost invariably did so please, or else the construction of it was so 
 liberal, and the titles of Acts allowed to be so indefinite, that it almost 
 meant nothing at all, and the benefits to be derived from it were 
 frittered away. But such has never been the law of Pennsylvania 
 That provision was not introduced into that State until the great abuses 
 of the old system of legislation were discovered, and since its intro- 
 duction there has not been one word of a judicial decision which inti- 
 mated for one moment that an act could contain two objects or one 
 object not clearly expressed in its title and still be constitutional. 
 Almost the last case on the subject — I allude to the case of the appeal 
 of the Union Passenger Railway Co., 29 Legal Intelligencer, 380 — is 
 a very strong one to show how far the Supreme Court of the State 
 holds the Legislature to that constitutional restriction. The Union 
 Pass. Railway Co. had been authorized to lay its railroad tracks through 
 the city of Philadelphia, in very many of its streets. They desired to 
 lay tracks in another street, and an act was introduced which was thus 
 entitled: "A further supplement to an Act entitled an Act to incorpo- 
 rate the Union Pass. Railway Co., approved April 8th, 1864, autho- 
 rizing said Company to declare dividends quarterly and to lay 
 additional tracks of railway." Now the Supreme Court said that is a 
 supplement ; of course you can add one, two, three, four or five powers 
 to the corporation by a supplement, just as you can give eight, ten, or 
 twelve powers to a corporation by an act to incorporate; the word 
 "supplement'' may be considered suflicieut to express that thus far the 
 title is sufficient, but when you say "simply to lay additional tracks of 
 railway," you do not say that the corporation is to occupy additional 
 territory, and therefore this title does not express the object of the act 
 and the act is unconstitutional. 
 
 That the natural implication from the title would be that the Railway 
 Company was to lay additional tracks where it already had tracks; and 
 if they wanted to extend their powers, if they wanted to lay a line of
 
 53 
 
 track where they had then no track laid, they must say so in the title 
 to their supplement. 
 
 Now sirs, in the face of that decision, how can the Reading Railroad 
 Company say that they have the right to subscribe to the stock of the 
 Reading Coal and Iron Co., by virtue of " An act to incorporate the 
 Laurel Run Improvement Company." 
 
 Senator Rutan : There is a remedy for that in the courts though. 
 Mr. Pettit: Yes, sir; there is a remedy for that in the courts; but 
 the remedy in the courts is only at the suit of the State. The Attorney 
 General is armed with the power to call any corporation to account by 
 filing his suggestion and asking for the writ of quo warranto; and if 
 his suggestion shows sufficient reason, the court is bound to grant it, 
 The Attorney General is the representative of the State, and therefore 
 it is a perfectly proper matter for you, gentlemen, whose attorney he 
 really is, to consider this question, and to say whether or not you will 
 direct him to file his suggestion and ask for the writ of quo loarranto, 
 to inquire by what authority it is that the Reading Railroad Company 
 claims and exercises the power to own coal lauds and mine coal. 
 
 Now, let us look at the question from a common sense view. Can it 
 be pretended, for a moment, in an assemblage other than one composed 
 of lawyers, used to so construing or trying to construe language as to 
 give words a sense opposite to that in which they are used and which 
 they would ordinarily bear, that when you have a constitutional provi- 
 sion, requiring that acts of assembly shall have, first, but one object; 
 and, secondly, that that object shall be clearly expressed in the title, 
 that an act to incorporate the Laurel Run Improvement Company with 
 one million of capital, can give the power, by virtue of that act to the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Co.. already in existence, to absorb 
 that charter and to expend some FIFTY MILLIONS or thereabouts 
 iu the purchase of coal lands, and to engage in the business of mining 
 coal. Can it be pretended that by virtue of that act a railroad com- 
 pany can do such a thing, and that there is but one subject in the act 
 and that subject is sufficiently indicated by such a title to the act? It 
 seems to me that the proposition is too plain to need further comment. 
 But these suggestions are merely incidental, for although pertinent 
 to the inquiry here, they do not present the inquiry itself. That 
 inquiry is simply whether this act to incorporate the Laurel Run 
 Improvement Company does give the Reading Railroad Company the 
 powers which it claims. The final decision of that question must rest
 
 54 
 
 with the courts, hut it is your duty as legislators, to so direct the 
 Attorney General of the Commonwealth, that it shall be brought before 
 the courts, to direct that it shall be properly raised lor them to pass 
 upon and filially decide. 
 
 This investigation was ordered by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, 
 in consequence of a petition, a copy of which I hold in my hand, which 
 sets out that on the 18th day of May, 1871, this Laurel Run Company 
 was incorporated by an act of Assembly, which contained more than one 
 subject, which subject was not clearly expressed in its title, according 
 to law; that shortly thereafter its title was altered to that of the 
 Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company, that the Phila- 
 delphia and Reading Railroad Company was its only stock-holder, 
 operating through it as an adjunct, and being thus enabled to engage 
 in such business as it is not permitted to engage in by its own charter; 
 "that the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company has 
 bought and is buying large bodies of coal and iron ore lands, and other 
 real estate, in this and other States, and has, through the almost 
 unlimited powers granted to the Laurel Run Improvement Company, 
 entered into many branches of business incompatible with the duties 
 of the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, as common carriers, 
 and with the freedom of the people of this and other States." And, 
 "That THEIR INTERFERENCE WITH THE RIGHTS OF THE 
 CITIZENS OF THIS COMMONWEALTH ALSO EXTENDS TO 
 MILLIONS OF THE PEOPLE OF OTHER STATES, all seriously 
 affected as consumers of Anthracite Coal, by a conspiracy into which 
 they have entered (and have been mainly instrumental in forming, and 
 which could not exist without them) with other chartered companies 
 controlling the production and transportation of Anthracite Coal." 
 
 In consequence of that petition, which was signed, not by any "three 
 tailors of Tooley Street," but by thousands of the citizens of this 
 commonwealth — so numerously signed that it appealed in a voice of 
 thunder at your doors, which compelled your attention to it, and 
 obliged you to raise the committee which I am now addressing this 
 resolution was passed. 
 
 "That whereas, the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company, 
 who are ostensible stockholders of the Philadelphia and Reading 
 Coal and Iron Company, are mining and selling coal in direct violation 
 of their chartered ritrhts."
 
 55 
 
 " And whereas," and I ask your careful attention to this, because it 
 is the gist of this inquiry, aud was carefully omitted when my friend 
 on the other side yesterday referred to this resolution. 
 
 '■And whereas, it has been represented upon good authority that 
 THE PHILADELPHIA AND READING- RAILROAD COM- 
 PANY HAVE CONSPIRED TO IMPROPERLY CONTROL THE 
 MINING AND TRANSPORTATION AND PRICE OF COAL. 
 
 And whereas, the complaint is of grave import, and warrants a 
 careful investigation by this body, to determine whether the said 
 Philadelphia aud Heading Railroad Company, or the Philadelphia and 
 Reading Coal and Iron Company, have in any manner exceeded the 
 rights and privileges granted to them by their charter. 
 
 Therefore be it Resolved, That this committee be appointed, &c. 
 
 The question of the unconstitutionality of the Laurel Run Act, so 
 far as it gives the Railroad Company any additional powers, referred to 
 alike in the petition and in the resolution, I have already argued ; and 
 the other question, that of the existence of the combination is the one 
 for you mainly to consider, because over that, you, and not the courts, 
 have jurisdiction. It is not a question, the decision of which you can 
 throw upon the Attorney General or the courts, but it is one which 
 you must decide for yourselves. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that these Reading Companies have combined with 
 the other large coal mining and transportation companies to govern and 
 control the price of coal, stands admitted, — it requires no argument to 
 demonstrate it, — but many reasons were given by my friend, the 
 learned counsel for the companies, as excuses for forming this 
 combination. 
 
 We are told, in the first place, as one reason for this combination, 
 that there was a certain condition of things existing in the anthracite 
 coal trade. What was it? Why, it was that everybody made his own 
 price — that was one feature of it. These New York companies, this 
 terrible power which had forced the Reading Railroad Company into 
 this policy, which had " converted " them — these companies were 
 competed with and competed with successfully by the individual miners 
 and operators of Schuylkill County. The companies were not always 
 the most successful; I doubt whether any one of them, certainly not 
 many of them, have mined more coal than a single individual operator, 
 namely, Mr. Pardee. We were told by one gentleman, Mr. Parrish, 
 when on the stand, that his company was on the verge of bankruptcy
 
 56 
 
 in 1872. But, Mr. Thomas, an individual operator, not owning his 
 own lands but having to pay to the City of Philadelphia a royalty on 
 every ton of coal he raised, — he told you that he was making money. 
 in 1872. Therefore this "condition of trade" that has been talked 
 about to you is a mere phantom; there was no sufficient warrant for 
 the representations made by my friend in that particular. The 
 Schulkill region was in the same condition then that it is to-day, except 
 so far as the individual operators have profited by the combination and 
 the Reading Railroad Company has absorbed the lands. The trade 
 was subject to the ordinary laws of trade; it was governed by the laws 
 of supply and demand. At certain times the price was lower than at 
 others ; sometimes, in periods of unusual scarcity, prices would rise, 
 but the fact remained that every man made his own price which was 
 regulated by competition ; every man made his own terms with his 
 miners or operatives ; he worked when he pleased, and he quit when 
 he pleased. If he did not like the business, he went out of it; if he 
 did not understand it or had not sufficient capital to run it, he would 
 fail, and if he had sufficient capital to carry it on he made money. 
 The prices varied : some collieries got more money for their coal than 
 did other collieries; some collieries prepared their coal better than did 
 other collieries; but the collieries themselves, the improvements, the 
 railroads, the planes, the breakers, the shafts, — everything which we 
 have had depicted before us as costing the individual so much more 
 than it cost the corporation — everything which was at the mercy of a 
 single spark from a passing locomotive was already there : in not one 
 single iota has the condition of the region in this respect been changed. 
 Now, there is another consideration worthy of mention in connection 
 with what has been said on this subject of the condition of trade in 
 1872. You will recollect — it is admitted by us and it is conceded by 
 the other side — that when these lands were purchased, these gentlemen 
 of the Philadelphia and Reading Companies did not intend to engage 
 in the business of mining or to enter into this combination. Con- 
 sequently we will find something that will be interesting in the 
 Report of the Company made in January, 1873, where reference is 
 made to the condition of the trade in 1872 ; this year which is 
 represented to have been so dreadful ; this year in which these coal 
 operators who have profited by this combination say they were on the 
 verge of bankruptcy, that they were losing seventy-five cents per ton, 
 that they did not know what would happen to them ; this year in
 
 57 
 
 which as they allege the coal trade was so universally depressed. 
 This is what the Reading Railroad Company tells its stockholders 
 and the public before they engaged in mining, and while they are 
 simply engaged in transporting coal and wanted the largest possible 
 tonnage. 
 
 I read from page 20 of the Report for that year (January, 1873) : 
 "The largely increased production of last season" (that is to say the 
 season of 1872 which, as you recollect, had been a full year; there 
 had been no strike ; every operator had worked his full number of 
 months and to his full capacity,) " was all disposed of. The market 
 was better during the last two months than at any other period of the 
 year, and it is believed that the stock of coal on hand at the close of 
 the shipment season of 1872 was no larger than that held at the close 
 of the previous year." 
 
 That is what they thought about it before this combination was 
 formed. And then on the next page or two — I will not read it all to 
 you — they go on to tell why it is that in 1873 they think the trade is 
 going to be so much better than ever it was before. They say it is 
 because in 1872 the prices were rather lower than they had been in 
 1871, that this had brought about an increased demand, and therefore 
 that the coal would have, more purchasers than it ever had before. 
 They say that nobody who has ever used anthracite coal as a domestic 
 fuel will ever use anything else, and that therefore, by reason of that 
 slight decrease in price, they were able to send it to the West and, to 
 some degree, to supplant wood and that they had no doubt that that 
 trade would not only continue but would increase. 
 
 They go on to state the beneficial effect that it has had upon 
 manufacturers and in every branch of business; they give full 
 particulars of why it is that that trade is to be so largely increased. 
 And after giving in detail their reasons on page 71, they say : " If the 
 above facts justify the belief that nearly three millions of tons more 
 coal will be required in 1873 than were seut to market in 1872, and if 
 by twelve mouths of steady work during 1872, the increased pro- 
 duction of coal over that of seven months' work during the previous 
 year was only about 3,300,000 tons, it is not unreasonable to suppose 
 that it will be difficult to produce this year any quantity so greatly in 
 excess of the demand as to depress the market to any considerable 
 degree." 
 
 They go on, then, to say therefore that, anticipating a large increase
 
 58 
 
 in their traffic, they have made a new mortgage of $60,000,000, and 
 are going to increase their facilities and to build more steam colliers. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, what do the operators say — these gentlemen who 
 came with such lung faces before you aud who were so extremely 
 desirous of impressing upon you the immense importance of this com- 
 bination to their existence in 1873, and how every one of them would 
 have gone to destruction if it had not been for that combination? 
 These gentlemen say, in response to the proposition that had been 
 made to them by Mr. Gowen to form a "pool" — I read from page 152 
 of the testimony — (you recollect they held a meeting and passed 
 several resolutions which were prefaced by the usual " whereas," these 
 coal operators express themselves very much in the style of the lawyers 
 sometimes) — they say : — 
 
 " Whereas, it is now self-evident to all parties understanding the 
 subject, that the period of greatest depression is past, because the 
 supply for 1873 will but little, if any, exceed the demand." 
 
 'J 1 hat was their opinion at that time ; and here let me say. it will 
 not do to cite subsequent events as a justification for this combination, 
 because this combination had been formed at this very time and two 
 months before it, while this trade was in such a prosperous condition 
 and while in these very last two months, after a full year, the supply 
 of coal on hand and unmarketed was no greater than it usually was 
 before, while these operators were of the opinion that the period of 
 greatest depression had passed. This combination was formed then, 
 and it was in view of the state of circumstances thus presented, and 
 not in view of future events or the depression in business which took 
 place in the next September, nearly a year afterwards, that this 
 combination was made. 
 
 As another reason for this combination, we were told that there was 
 a great difference between the line and city trade and the tide-water 
 trade; we were told that the manufacturers ou the waters of the 
 Hudson and on Massachusetts Bay, got their coal at a rate a dollar 
 per ton cheaper than that at which it was supplied to the gentlemen 
 who manufactured in the valley of the Schuylkill. 
 
 Why was this, let me ask : when you took the coal out of the earth, 
 did it cost one dollar per ton less to take it to Boston than when you 
 were going to leave it at Phoenixville? why, of course not. The 
 reason of it was because the tolls, the drawbacks were made to fit the 
 case. We are told that these gentlemen appealed to the President of
 
 50 
 
 the Railway Company, and said, "how is this? we are going to move 
 to the Hudson; we can get our coal cheaper there than we can 
 nere — w hy is it that we can get it a dollar per ton cheaper there than 
 we can get it here?" The fact could not be denied that the gentleman 
 himself or the company he represented carried the coal past the doors 
 of these manufacturers in the valley of the Schuylkill to tide-water, 
 and shipped it to New York for a dollar per ton less than he charged 
 these manufacturers along the line of his road. It was not these 
 operators, it was not these factors, it was not these retailers who were 
 guilty of this extortionate discrimination; they had nothing to do with 
 that. Messrs. Branson and Borda and Van Dusen had nothing to do 
 with that. These very Phoenixville works, that the gentlemen spoke 
 of yesterday, right on the line of the road, that were condemned to go 
 to the Hudson, had their coal only upon paying an extra dollar per 
 ton, for the reason that at Port Richmond the drawbacks were so made. 
 If this company was so exclusively a Pennsylvania corporation as has 
 been claimed here, and was seeking to develop our State in preference 
 to New York or any other locality, if they were so firmly devoted to 
 building up the interests of our State, if every ton of coal burned in 
 process of manufacture along the line of their road gives them so much 
 more tonnage, and gives them so much more profit, that they look alone 
 to the interests of the people of our commonwealth, as they would have 
 us believe, why did they not carry for the Phoenixville people at the 
 same rate that they carried for the New York and Boston people? 
 
 Another alleged reason for this combination was the extortions of 
 THE MIDDLEMEN. And here I recollect that the only occasion 
 upon which I have noticed any question being made concerning the 
 ability with which the Reading companies are managed, was when I 
 saw in a Boston paper a little squib, in which it was stated that the 
 President of those companies was suffering from MIDDLE MANIA 
 CEREBRA; and that this criticism was not wholly out of place, is 
 evident from the fact that when the gentleman rose and commenced to 
 address you, he began on the middlemen; he hit them all the way 
 through and gave them almost the last words of his speech. Who are 
 the middlemen? are they a peculiarity of the coal business, or a class 
 that does not appear in any other business? Does not the manufacturer 
 in the East who makes his cheese or his shoes have his agent elsewhere 
 to sell the_article? Every manufacturer has a middleman ; all whole- 
 salers have middlemen ; and in the purchase and sale of almost every
 
 60 
 
 article you buy there are, in addition to the manufacturer and the man 
 from whom you make the purchase, almost a dozen middlemen 
 concerned. It is " the middlemen " who make up our community. 
 It would be perhaps a very nice thing if there were no " middlemen," 
 many articles might be a great deal cheaper, but then unfortunately 
 none of us would have any money to buy with, because, indeed, we 
 would most of us be without occupation. We are all, more or less, 
 " middlemen." 
 
 Now, as was stated by my friend and colleague in opening this case, 
 we called two or three representative men among these factors of the 
 coal men, and they have been alluded to at considerable length by 
 my friend. 
 
 The first that was mentioned was Mr. Van Dusen. He belonged to 
 this dreadful class, this class that ate up all the profits and added so 
 much to the cost of coal, as was attempted to be shown you; he was 
 one of those who held wharves at Richmond. 
 
 And now let me say a word about the assumed generosity of the 
 company in regard to its wharves at Richmond. They claim that that 
 property is worth ten millions of dollars, and they assume a certain 
 merit for not having before this sold that property, and they almost say 
 they would have sold it except that they wanted to develop the 
 mercantile interests of Philadelphia. Why, gentlemen, when making 
 that statement, the learned couusel must have forgotten that the very 
 testimony before you shows, that at those wharves in Richmond he 
 ships 2,500,000 tons of coal and that every ton of that number pays 
 him $2. Therefore, when he can get $5,000,000 per year of rent for 
 a property assumed to be worth $10,000,000, I do not wonder that he 
 does not sell the property. I think he regards it as a good enough 
 speculation as it is. Why should they sell it ? 
 
 Mr. Van Dusen, who got his wharf for nothing, had a business 
 there, if 1 recollect his testimony, of about 70.000 tons a year; and 
 that 70,000 tons paid the Reading Railroad Company $110,000 per 
 year in tolls. At about the time that Mr. Van Dusen's wharf was 
 taken away from him by this circular of December 27th, 1872, be 
 wrote a letter to the company upon that subject. It was a very plain, 
 straight-forward letter. Recollect that this gentleman had done a very 
 large business; his annual tonnage there at Port Richmond alone was 
 70,000 tons; he had been in the business for a life time; he had paid 
 the Reading Company millions of dollars of toll. The circular, when
 
 61 
 
 he received it, came upon him like a thunder-clap. He had offices in 
 New York and in Boston. These " middlemen," as you will recollect 
 the testimony proved, had pushed the coal of the Schuylkill region 
 from the Valley of the Schuylkill almost down to the Gulf on the one 
 side, and clear up to Maine on the other. Wherever it could reach by 
 tide-water, Schuylkill coal, through the exertions of these "middle- 
 men," was to be found. In the letter which he wrote to the President 
 of the Railroad Company, immediately or shortly after receipt of the 
 circular, this gentleman said : — 
 
 "As the trade seems to be shaping, from the action of your com- 
 pany, it looks to us that our firm, who do not represent any particular 
 coal at present, must be forced out and abandon a business int which 
 we have been engaged the best part of our lives. This naturally 
 causes us some alarm. 
 
 Taking it for granted that the product of Schuylkill coal for the 
 year 1873 is controlled by your company, and those who mine and sell 
 their own product, with a few exceptions, we are at a loss to answer 
 your circular of December 27th, addressed to us in reference to our 
 application for wharf room. For the last nineteen years, our Mr. Van 
 Dusen, with different associates, has had allotted him wharf room at 
 Richmond, and during all these years his different firms have never 
 received a complaint from your company under its respective manage- 
 ment, and he has used his capital both in the business of mining and 
 selling Schuylkill coal. 
 
 The conditions of the circular and control of the coal as herein 
 stated, are our virtual expulsion from your wharves, and our being 
 driven, after long years of active labor, suddenly from the business 
 at Richmond." 
 
 This gentlemen who, for nineteen years, had been connected with 
 this business, was driven out of the business so suddenly that, as he 
 himself tells you, had it not been that he had some provision made 
 for his family, he would have had to go to the almshouse. The Presi- 
 dent of the Company when approached, not by this gentleman but by 
 a friend of his, and asked whether he (Van Dusen ) could not be 
 allowed to retain his wharf said (referring to the middlemen of whom 
 he has spoken here with so much of bitterness) : "Tell Mr. Van Dusen, 
 we want him and men like him for the purpose of selling our coal." 
 I allude now to the testimony of Mr. Rommel. This "middleman" 
 and the men like him, were the men that were wanted for the purpose
 
 62 
 
 of selling this coal until the combination got fully under way. Now, 
 another "middleman" was Mr. Borda. This gentleman had been 
 connected with the trade in every imaginable way. He had been an 
 engineer, an operator, a factor, a shipper, and had a large business. 
 His tonnage from Port Richmond in the year 1872 was. I think — the 
 gentleman will correct me if I am wrong — 140,000 tons. That would 
 pay $280,000 of tolls to the Reading Kailroad Company a year. 
 
 This gentleman, it appears, is in business there yet. He has been 
 alluded to as having interfered in the management of these companies, 
 but, sirs, 1 say that he deserved honor for his course, and I would 
 there were more men like him in the community who, almost alone of 
 those who are in that business, and with a business in competition 
 with these corporations and in their power, dares to stand up and 
 oppose them. He has been accused of interfering in the management 
 of the companies, and a letter was read to you in support of the alle- 
 gation. I have some hesitation in alluding to the matter at all, and 
 yet it does seem to me to be only fair and proper, by way of an answer 
 to what has been said, to state the fact, and I speak that which I do 
 know, for it is a fact within my own personal knowledge, and I thought 
 it was known to the learned counsel for the defence — that that letter 
 and the plan therein proposed, was not the plan of the gentleman 
 who signed that letter at all, but was so written and prepared at the 
 direct suggestion of one of the largest stockholders in the Reading 
 Road — one of those "two Irishmen and one Scotchman" that we have 
 heard something about. It was written for him, and was simply trans- 
 posed into his language and signed by him. Rut, sirs, this gentleman 
 is safe in his business. Some merit has been claimed here for the 
 fact, that a man who is opposed to the company can yet do business 
 with them and can still live. Why it would be a most monstrous 
 thing if, when I wanted to come to this place, I should be denied the 
 right to come by railroad, and be obliged to come down on horseback, 
 because I did not happen to be on friendly terms with the President or 
 management of this Camden and Atlantic Railroad Company. Where 
 would we be if, when we wanted to transact our daily business, and to go 
 hither and thither as we are called, we had first to inquire whether 
 there was some gentleman whom we knew or did not know, or with 
 whom we had or did not have some difficulty, who controlled the avenue 
 to that place? Of course Mr. Borda is in no danger, these gentlemen 
 are but the servants of the public, they are bound to carry for who-
 
 63 
 
 ever demands the use of their facilities and will pay for thein. With 
 reference to these commissions and charges that have been made by 
 these gentlemen, these factors, and which have been the subject of bo 
 much animadversion here, I find by the testimony they appear to be 
 these : These gentlemen get a guarantee commission of from twenty to 
 twenty-five cents per ton on the larger sizes of coal sold, and from ten 
 to fifteen cents per ton on the smaller sizes of coal sold. This business 
 of dumpage and over-weight that we have heard about — all that was a 
 mere matter of arrangement between the miner and the shipper. No 
 man was compelled to go to any particular wharf or any particular 
 factor. These wharves were big enough to accommodate the whole 
 trade and more too. Why, you gentlemen saw when you went up 
 there, that these wharves at the upper end of the Richmond yard, the 
 smaller wharves, were occupied by the individual coal dealers, by these 
 gentlemen who are still left in the business, whose tonnage has been 
 so cut down that they can get along with a smaller wharf; but the big 
 wharves, the very wharves that these men had previously occupied, 
 are now occupied by the Reading Company, and that several of them, 
 a considerable proportion of them, were lying there with very little 
 doing. We saw the bins with very little coal in them, the tracks 
 apparently unused. That was the case with two or three wharves at 
 all events, and I think it was the case with a great many odd bins 
 all the way through. You had the same opportunity to observe these 
 things that I had, and you can correct me if I am mistaken. 
 
 Now, this matter of over-weight and these dumpages were mere 
 matters of arrangement. The Reading Company charged so much a 
 ton fur putting the coal in the vessel, and would not permit this to be 
 done except by their own employees. We have not a word to say 
 against that; that may have been all proper enough, possibly there 
 were good reasons for it. They made a charge for that, and the 
 amount of that charge, and the amount of the over-weight, was known 
 to the operator, as was also the amount of dumpage, and he could 
 have his choice of paying the charge and taking the over-weight and 
 dumpage, or giving the over weight and dumpage to the shipper, and 
 the latter paying the charge for loading the coal on the vessels. There 
 was no compulsion about the factor's charge; and. after all, if the 
 miner or operator, as he is called, did not want to deal with the factor, 
 he could be his own factor and deal with himself. So that we will 
 leave all that out and come down to this guarantee commission of *J0
 
 64 
 
 to 25 cents a ton on the large sizes, and 10 to 15 cents a ton on the 
 small sizes. Ah, that was an outrageous thing ! Just think of it — 25 
 cents a ton ! Why the exclamation of the gentleman on the other side, 
 as he dwelt upon this monstrous charge, were almost like the learned 
 counsel's allusions to the warming-pan in Pickwick. 
 
 Gentlemen, THE HEADING COMPANIES WERE GOING 
 TO DO THIS FACTORS BUSINESS FOR TEN CENTS A 
 TON, and were going to enter into a fair competition with these 
 middlemen ; and by virtue of the fact that they would do for ten cents 
 what these gentlemen charged from ten to twenty-five cents for, they 
 were going to gain their customers from them. Now, did they go into 
 a fair competition ? Let us see h&w this thing worked, because it is 
 very important, and I ask your particular attention to it. The 
 company was to do it for ten cents and, as you recollect, they proposed 
 to the operators very kindly and generously, as they said that they 
 could keep their wharves and do a business of the same proportion of 
 tonnage that they had theretofore done, provided that they would do 
 it for ten cents a ton. Now, I had the curiosity to compare the com- 
 panies' figures and any of you, gentlemen, can compare them after me 
 as I read them to you from the testimony and their circular price 
 lists. In March, 1873, when this "pool" arrangement opened, they 
 paid the pool $2.60 a ton for their coal, at Port. Carbon. They 
 charged other people — and therefore they are entitled to that charge 
 or credit, whichever you may call it — $2 per ton tolls or freights from 
 Port Carbon to Port Richmond ; and therefore the coal cost them, to 
 deliver on board at Port Richmond, not less than $4.60 a ton. But 
 when they commenced this competition, they delivered coal on board 
 at Port Richmond, as you will see by their price lists, at $4.30 a ton. 
 In other words, they lost 30 cents a ton then. Well, they went on ; 
 but that was the way that they started. In December, when the 
 shipping season of that year had closed, they had their grasp more 
 firmly upon the operators of Schuylkill and the price had gone up. 
 In December, they paid the pool $2.95 a ton ; their freights were $2 
 a ton; that made $4.95. They charged for the delivery on board the 
 vessel at Port Richmond, $5 a ton and there made a profit of 5 cents 
 a ton. That was only one-half of what they were going to ask. You 
 will see that the operators got 35 cents per tou more in December than 
 they did in March, but that the company got seventy cents more in 
 December than they did in March ; of the advance in the price, these
 
 65 
 
 companies took twice as much as they gave the operators. Now, in 
 April, 1874, when their shipping season again commenced and when 
 they had the thing more firmly than ever in their own hands, they 
 paid the pool $2.70. Their freights being 82 per ton, that made 
 84.70 ; and they delivered it for 84.90. Then they made a profit of 
 twenty cents a ton. and that was just double what they started out to 
 make. Thus with the lapse of a single year, this ten cents a ton had 
 swollen to twenty cents a ton, and at the close of 1874 — in December, 
 1874 — they paid the pool S3. 40 a ton ; their freights were 82 a ton, 
 which made 85.40 a ton, but they then charged for it at 85.90 a tou, 
 delivered at Port Richmond. In other words, THEY MADE 
 FIFTY CENTS A TON— JUST DOUBLE, in two years run of 
 this business, THE HIGHEST THAT THESE AWFUL FACT- 
 ORS HAD EVER DARED TO CHARGE, and five times as much 
 as they advertised they would do the business for when they started in 
 this "fair" competition. 
 
 Why, sirs, that very table published by themselves shows you what 
 has been the effect of this thing. They started in fair competition, as 
 they call it, and did the business at a loss of thirty cents a ton, but 
 from March, 1873, to December, 1874, they had changed that result 
 from thirty cents on the loss side to a profit of fifty cents per ton, or 
 double the amount which Mr. Borda or Mr. Van Dusen had ever 
 asked anybody. These gentlemen had offices in New York and 
 Boston, in Baltimore and Washington, besides their home offices in 
 Philadelphia, with all the necessary book-keepers, clerks and salesmen 
 engaged for this very business of selling their consignors coal, and 
 for that service and expense they received from ten to twenty-five 
 cents commissiou, but this Reading Coal and Iron Company had all 
 their offices and employees already engaged, as the gentleman himself 
 admits, they were not at a dollar of additional expense, and yet they 
 charge and collect fifty cents a ton for this very service. 
 
 Well, sirs, another feature of this dreadful experience of the 
 Railroad Company that we have heard of, and another reason or 
 excuse for the formation of this combination, was that there was a 
 combination of the retailers. That was a dreadful state of circum- 
 stances. I want to say very little upon this subject, because it has 
 been fully adverted to by my friend in opening the case, and was dis- 
 cussed by the gentleman on the other side. The reasons given had 
 no existence, THE FACT WAS PROVEN THAT THERE WAS
 
 66 
 
 NO COMBINATION OF RETAILERS. You will recollect that 
 when the taking of the testimony was commenced, the first question 
 that was asked our witnesses on the stand on cross examination was, 
 " Do you helong to the Retail Coal Dealers' Association?" Some of 
 them said "yes," some said "no," and some said there was no such 
 thing. We did not understand these answers, and I asked Mr. Ellis 
 Branson about the association and, upon his giving me the information, 
 I asked him to come upon the stand and tell you, gentlemen, what he 
 had told me. It then turned out that this terrible combination of 
 retail coal dealers had been an association of less than one-third of the 
 trade, with a treasury made up by the payment of $1;^, a year dues, for 
 the expenses of a room to meet in, who had met together for the pur- 
 pose of going before you gentlemen at Harrisburg, and getting a law 
 passed by which the carts from which the coal is sold might be 
 inspected, so that full weight should be insured and gentlemen like the 
 Messrs. Branson should not be driven out of business by dishonest 
 competition, that that was the whole object of the Retail Coal Dealers 
 Association, that they had not held a meeting for eighteen months; 
 and that at the meeting they then held there was not a quorum, and 
 they had adjourned to meet whenever nine members thought it was 
 necessary; and that nine members never have thought it was necessary 
 from that day to this. That wound up the Retail Coal Dealers' Asso- 
 ciation, and we heard no more questions about it. And then we came 
 to the subject of their prices, and upon that we have heard a great 
 deal. But let me mention to you here, gentlemen, a circumstance that 
 is to be taken into consideration in this question of prices, namely, 
 that much depends upon the colliery from which the coal comes, much 
 depends upon its state of preparation, much depends upon the size of 
 the coal, and upon a great many different things. There was no 
 uniform price among the coal dealers themselves. As has been stated 
 before you and as you very well know, any man could go into the 
 business ; all that a party required, as was admitted by my friend on 
 the other side, was to get an endorser for his one week's or two weeks' 
 freight bill. The business was open to unlimited competition, and 
 many men who had broken down in other businesses went into it. 
 Prices varied in it, there was and and is no uniform standard by which 
 you can estimate them. When the gentlemen spoke of how low the 
 prices of the Coal and Iron Company were as compared with those of 
 the retail coal dealers, I recollected that on the very same page of the
 
 67 
 
 paper containing the very eloquent opening that was made for the 
 defence, I had seen the publication of the prices of the Philadelphia 
 and Heading Coal and Iron Company, in which stove and small stove 
 coal was put down at $6.85 per ton delivered; and I recollected that 
 Mr. Kersey had testified that his price for stove coal delivered was $7- 
 Well, they are within fifteeu cents of Mr. Kersey's price now ; and if 
 we take the developments of the past as to the manner of conducting 
 this " pool " business as an indication of our probable experience in 
 the future, particularly as to the way in which the company got rid of 
 the twenty-five cents per ton which the factors made, by charging fifty 
 cents per ton themselves, it will not be a very great while before that 
 difference of fifteen cents is fully made up. 
 
 Another subject to which I would invite your attention is that of 
 the power of this railroad and coal corporation. I do not stand before 
 you to eDgage in any denunciation of corporations in general. I am 
 arguing this case upon its merits, and I desire to say nothing but that 
 which is applicable to it, and to speak only of the record before you ; 
 but it is fair and proper for me to say something about the power of 
 these two particular corporations. A great deal has been said upon a 
 matter to which I would not now allude, had it not been spoken of by 
 the gentleman for the defence, viz. : the interview in December, 1872, 
 when this pool was proposed, and when the gentleman offered to handle 
 the operators' coal for ten cents a ton. You will recollect it was stated 
 that when his proposition was not acceded to, Mr. GOWEN "got 
 ugly" and was "AGGRAVATED BY OPPOSITION.'' We have 
 all had more or less intercourse with Mr. Gowen, and I think we can 
 all say, that personally and as an associate, there are very few men 
 whose company we would prefer to his. When it was said, therefore, 
 that he had 'GOT UGLY," something else must have been meant 
 than that Mr. Gowen was simply angry, or was "aggravated by oppo- 
 sition," as one of their own friends stated to you. What was meant 
 by that expression? Why, sirs, as Mr. Thomas has stated to you, the 
 coal operators regarded it as "THE SULLEN MURMURINGS OF 
 A POWERFUL CORPORATION," and it was that which alarmed 
 those men The fact that Mr. Gowen "got ugly," or that he was 
 "aggravated by opposition," or that he "had a threatening manner," 
 had a special significance and was of ominous import, when it was 
 understood that he spoke with the whole power of these corporations 
 behind him, and these men felt that what he was saying and doing
 
 68 
 
 was not merely his own volition, but was the utterance and the act of 
 the Reading Railroad Company. Well, now what does the gentleman 
 say? Sirs, he admits that this understanding or interpretation was 
 correct. "Why," he says, "gentlemen, did'nt I tell you I would 
 protect you." Time and time again he asked the witnesses that ques- 
 tion. He has even stated here, and did so day before yesterday, when 
 alluding to the fact that he had received letters from people who had 
 been subpcened and who said that they did not know anything about 
 the case, that he had said to them, "You can come — tell all you know 
 — we won't punish you." The idea! "Upon what meat doth this, our 
 Cesar feed, that he hath grown so great?" Why, sirs, punish a man 
 for coming to testify to the truth in a Court of justice ! Protect a man 
 in his business, in that which makes your business, and upon which 
 you are as dependent for your profits as he is for his livelihood ! This 
 very circumstance, trifling as it is, shows, as does a feather the way 
 the wind blows, and indicates the enormous power of these corporations. 
 Then, too, it is in testimony before you, that this company has said 
 that it can make up in six month's time all that it has lost by six 
 month's idleness of the miners, the operators and people dependent on 
 them. Can these latter do that? No. Can the company do it? Yes. 
 Why? Because, as has been stated to you by one of their warmest 
 friends, and one of those gentleman whom my friend thought we were 
 sorry we had called, but whom I think to have been one of our best 
 witnesses; I allude to Mr. Neill, because THESE COMPANIES 
 CAN EXTORT WHAT TERMS THEY PLEASE. 
 
 Now, sirs, do they use this power? Here I want to repeat what I 
 stated in the beginning, that I do not believe — and I do not stand here 
 to charge or insinuate but expressly deny — that anything that is done 
 by that company, or by any official of that company, is for the private 
 benefit, direct or indirect, in any way, manner or form, of any officer 
 or employee of it: it is for the company alone. But the company 
 alone does make use of this power. Seven witnesses have stood before 
 you and testified to the fact that they could not get cars at times when 
 the Coal and Iron Company did get cais; that theirs were then on 
 the road ; that their way bills had been received and their freights 
 paid; that they saw the company's cars taken out of the train and run 
 into the company's yard, and their own cars (the cars of the witnesses) 
 left upon the siding. The colliers, you are told by the very operators 
 themselves who are so unfriendly to us, the colliers, you are told, are
 
 69 
 
 used by them exclusively and do not always, at all events, transport 
 for individuals, but frequently refuse to do so. And when asked why 
 was this, the gentleman for the other side replied, :< Is there any obli- 
 gation in our charter to compel us to carry your coal in our colliers ?" 
 Now. as to that, gentlemen of the committee, I ask any of you who 
 are lawyers, whether any such thing can be conceived of by the legal 
 mind, as a common carrier, by land or by water, who is not obliged to 
 carry for whoever offers to pay the freight. They are bound to carry, 
 and their colliers and their water transportation business are just as 
 much a part of their business as common carriers, as their tracks and 
 their cars. Yet they have refused to do so. Again, THEY HAVE 
 REFUSED TO SELL COAL TO PARTICULAR PERSONS. 
 That may seem a very trifling thing, but at the same time, gentlemen, 
 if you carry that out to its logical conclusion, what is the result? Are 
 they to be entitled to say they will sell to me and will not sell to you, 
 or that they will sell to you and will not sell to me ? Where is the man 
 who is left out in the cold — what is he to do? Three or four witnesses 
 testified to that very condition of things; and one of them, a witness 
 who is entirely unimpeached in any way — Mr. Kepner — was asked 
 (and he specified the name of the very gentleman whom he asked to 
 sell him the coal) — he was asked, "was not that during the strike?" 
 u Oh, no. it was not," said Mr. Kepner; "it was at such and such a 
 time, and long before the strike." 
 
 Then again — to come back to this very factor interest — you have the 
 testimony of Mr. Rorda that he had bought a lot of coal, and was 
 taking all they could turn out from one of the collieries that was in the 
 pool, and they were stopped from sending it to him. And again, some 
 Lehigh and Wilkesbarre coal, 20,000 tons, that he had made a contract 
 to sell for that coal company on commission, was taken away from him, 
 at the command and by the power of this company, supported by these 
 combinations. 
 
 Another thing is this rule which we may call the TWO COLLIERY 
 RULE. I can hardly believe that the gentleman supposed that what 
 he said in relation to that was any answer to the testimony on this point. 
 The rule was this: it was a new rule made since the Reading Company 
 had become a miner: that where a company or person had more than 
 one colliery, he could get all his cars for all his collieries, or for two or 
 more of them sent to any one particular colliery. When there was a 
 reduction, then those gentlemen who had two collieries, or this company,
 
 70 
 
 which had thirty-eight collieries, could still keep some of their collieries 
 running at their full capacity, while the others, the very great majority, 
 who had but one colliery, could not, Now, how did that work practically 
 and as a matter of business? You will recollect, Mr. Hunt/inker's testi- 
 mony in relation to the iron men. It was this: Iron men require a 
 particular kind of coal suitable to their furnaces. It must burn with 
 the blast which they have. Secondly, they do not want to mix it. 
 because different coals have different proportions of sulphur or phosphorus, 
 and to mix them may injure the iron. Therefore and for those reasons 
 they want it steadily as they have ordered and expected it. because every 
 one knows the very great loss that ensues if they have to blow out their 
 fires. 
 
 Now then, gentlemen, before the Coal and Iron Co. was in existence, 
 all these iron works ran; they made their contracts with individual 
 collieries and they could get the coal they wanted and had ordered. 
 because the collieries could get the cars to fill their orders, but when 
 these car detentions we have heard of, and of which I shall presently 
 speak, commenced, it often happened they had difficulty to get the 
 coal they wanted from individuals, and, under this new rule, many of 
 them had to leave their individual collieries and had to go to the Coal 
 and Iron Company. Why? Because, for instance, if I had a colliery 
 which could ship 50.000 tons, and I had made my contracts with an iron 
 manufacturer on that basis, then when there was a curtailment in the 
 supply of cars, I could only send, say one-half the quantity ordered and 
 which I had agreed to send, because I could not get the cars to send it in. 
 But this company, having more than one colliery, and one of which 
 would suit this party just as well as mine, could turn all their cars into 
 that colliery and could fill that contract, Therefore, he would have to 
 leave me and go to them. Now. that was the way in which that rule 
 worked, and in consequence of it, many iron masters were compelled to 
 give up the individual operators with whom they had been dealing, 
 because they were unable at all times to fill their orders by reason of the 
 curtailment of the cars, and go to the Reading Company for their coal 
 because they were always able, notwithstanding these curtailments, by 
 virtue of this two colliery rule, to ship all the coal that was required 
 from any one of their collieries. 
 
 We now come to this QUESTION OF THE COMBINATION. 
 The first effect of the existence of that combination was the taking off 
 of the five per cent,, and the taking off of the five per cent, of course
 
 71 
 
 correspondingly raised the price — you and I, and everybody, had to pay 
 five per cent, more for coal than we had to pay previously. And here 
 let me notice the fact that a great deal has been said upon this subject 
 of freight ; and I shall only touch upon that subject by saying this, 
 incidentally to the taking off of that five per cent., that, as soon as this 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company undertook to give true 
 weight or exact weight, I say they tailed. I do not mean to say from 
 tin- testimony that they have intentionally given one man short-weight 
 and another man over-weight; but I do say this, that in the hurry 
 necessarily incident to their business, the coal could not be weighed 
 accurately. And they themselves admit this, because whenever any of 
 these complaints of short-weight were made, they answered the com- 
 plainants by saying, "we think you will find that the overs exceed the 
 shorts." Now. when you weigh a thing, you want to know the exact 
 weight; the very purpose of weighing is to get accuracy; and therefore 
 this inaccuracy which had theretofore been covered by the five per cent. 
 was now endured by anybody upon whom it happened to fall; and some- 
 time- it fell on some persous onerously, while others may ha\ r e been 
 benefitted by it. Their own testimony shows, taking their own tables as 
 to the result at Poit Richmond, that while Mr. Lewis Snyder got 
 only ,J,s of one per cent, over-weight, the Reading Coal and Iron 
 Company got 2 1 ! &a of one per cent, over-weight. While Mr. Snyder got 
 almost exact weight, the latter got nearly 2* per cent, over-weight. 
 What chance had Mr. Snyder in competition with the company ? You 
 see it did not operate fairly all around, and therefore it is that these 
 uentlenien ought, and I have no doubt that they will, and I think that 
 you. gentlemen, should see that they do, hereafter take some steps by 
 which a more liberal weight may be insured, and that coal which is 
 suspected of being '-short." may be weighed by some proper authority 
 before the purchaser is compelled to take it. Now, this "combination," 
 while its existence is admitted here and need not be argued, is a some- 
 what complex thing, and I must ask your particular attention while I 
 endeavor to show you exactly how it was that it was brought about and 
 operated. When these gentleman of the Reading Companies became 
 converts to the theory that carrying companies should also be coal pro- 
 ducers, this combination of six companies was formed; and by that 
 combination, as you have seen, it was provided that the tonnage should 
 be distributed pro rata among the different companies to be sold at a 
 certain price agreed upon, commencing at one figure and steadily
 
 72 
 
 advancing through the year. Now, you can yourselves see how 
 necessarily that involved a control of production. Each region was to 
 sell a certain per centage of the whole amount of coal sold; the total 
 sale being fixed at a certain figure to commence with, and being 
 curtailed by the committee whenever in their opinion the market would 
 not take their coal at the price they had agreed upon. 
 
 You will see by reference to the " Engineering and Mining Journal." 
 (New York, December 19th. 1874. p. 392,) not only the percent ■. 
 which were originally allotted, but the percentages according to the 
 amended quotas as they went along, and the exact amount of their dif- 
 ferent shipments. The companies other than the Reading were at that 
 time in this position. They had control of their own regions entirely and 
 supplied their own lines; the Pennsylvania Coal Company, for instance, 
 had a monopoly along the line of the Erie Railroad, because they were 
 the only company shipping along that road: the Delaware. Lackawanna 
 and Western had a control over the line of its road, they had a monopoly 
 there until they got to a competitive point, and so on with the others. 
 Now, as you will understand, gentlemen, in mining coal, as has been 
 testified to before you, it is necessary that the mines should work as 
 nearly to their full capacity as possible, otherwise there will be a loss. 
 These companies working these mines would supply their own line trade, 
 and their surplus, or whatever of their coal was over the supply needed 
 by their line trade would go to the seaboard to be sold East or South. 
 But while all the others had control of the mines of their own regions, 
 the Reading Company did not control the mines of its own region. The 
 other companies could say, "we have got enough to supply our line 
 trade, we have sent to the seaboard enough to supply our quota of the 
 agreed amount to go to competitive points, now we will stop."' But the 
 Reading Companies could not say this, because they had in their own 
 region a large number of individual operators, and therefore they — did 
 what? In the first place, they formed this "pool." I do not believe 
 that the object of that pool was, as has been pretended, to make the ten 
 cents which has now been multiplied by five and has grown to fifty cents 
 per ton on the coal, but its object was this, that the Reading Company 
 could have all the coal, or so large a proportion of it that it was 
 substantially all the coal, that came over its road to Port Richmond, 
 and thereby they could have control of all the coal that came from the 
 Schuylkill region to tide-water, whether it was more or less than or equal 
 to their quota. You yourselves heard this from one of the witnesses
 
 73 
 
 who had a lot of coal — lump, steamboat, or something of the kind — 
 that the pool did not want, because the pool had their quota ; it was 
 for this reason they did not want it and they said. " don't send us any 
 more," and then the witness tried to sell it through Mr. Borda, and then 
 he was stopped. But the reason for this was, as I have stated, that 
 they were obliged to have the control of the coal that came to the sea- 
 board, and therefore they made their pool. 
 
 Now, the next thing was to CONTROL THE OPERATORS so 
 that they should not produce more than the "quota." How was that 
 to be done? Sirs, I will show you to a certainty that it was done BY 
 THIS SYSTEM OF CAR. DETENTIONS and was the sole end 
 and purpose of those car detentions. "Why," they say, "these car 
 detentions averaged only so and so, and amounted to but very little. 
 Every witness called on that point testified, I think without exception, 
 to the fact of these detentions, until you, gentlemen, quite tired of hear- 
 ing it, said to us " don't call any more witnesses about car detentions, 
 we don't want to hear anything more about it," just as you had already 
 said to us about short- weights, "the thing is proved — now let us hear 
 the explanation." Now, during the examination of the witnesses, (and 
 I ask your attention to this particularly, because it shows whether or 
 not this car detention was the little thing that they now try to make it 
 out to be,) many things were suggested by the other side by way of 
 explanation, and as one was shown to be untenable, another was chosen and 
 advanced as explanatory of the fact. First they said, if this did happen, it 
 was not their fault ; and you will recollect that when some of the gentlemen 
 testified they could not get their coal, that they had paid their freights, 
 that the cars were on their way somewhere between Philadelphia and Potts- 
 ville, that their customers were demanding their coal and they could not 
 get any coal, they went down to the railroad office and asked about it and 
 were told, "well, gentlemen, there is some mistake about it ; the operators 
 could not have informed you properly about it." The answer to that 
 was, " here is my receipt for the freight ; the cars are on your road, or 
 else you could not have sent me the bill for the freight." "Well, then," 
 said the representative of the company, "the cars are on the way, and I 
 don't know where the coal is." One of the witnesses was asked this 
 question, "How do you know that your cars were loaded;" "suppose 
 the cars were furnished and the operator did not load and send you the 
 coal you ordered, was that our fault?" But the answer was, that the 
 way-bill had been received and consequently the car must have been
 
 74 
 
 loaded. When this explanation was found to be untenable, they next 
 .said to the witnesses. "Do you order cars; did you ever order a car in 
 your life; do you know how the cars are distributed; do you know who 
 the district despatchers were; did you ever go to the district despatches , 
 do you know anything, of your own personal knowledge, about it?" 
 And then they objected to any further testimony, upon the allegation 
 that it was hearsay; and that was ruled out. The witnesses could only 
 testify that they had ordered coal, paid their freights, their yards were 
 empty, they could get no coal, their customers were asking for more and 
 threatening to go to the Coal and Iron Company, and in some instances did 
 go there and get it. However, this testimony was stopped, until that id' 
 the despatchers could be had. But the company had said something 
 about blockades, and they ventured a question upon that. They said, 
 "Don't you know that blockades happen along the road?" And the 
 witnesses answered, "Yes." Now, it is very singular that they never 
 happened before. In 1S72, or theretofore, there had occasionally been 
 a delay of one or two days by an accident — that might happen any- 
 wheres, there was no complaint on that score at all — but these 
 blockades, as they are called, had not happened, these large numbers of 
 cars had not been stopped before this year, 1873. Then, too. they 
 place it at a time subsequent to the panic: "Since the panic has there 
 not been a blockade?" they ask. Well, it turns out that the blockade 
 was before the panic, and that the blockade commenced in the winter of 
 1S7M, and was all through 1873 and all through 1874, mure or less. 
 Then they say to the witnesses, "Don't you know this — that if a coal 
 car goes on a siding, owing to a blockade or anything of that kind, it 
 has to stay there, that the through trains must come down, and that the 
 unfortunate coal that gets upon a siding must be left there, until such 
 time as the local trains get there and take it oil'."' Well, the witnesses 
 did not know anything about it, but they thought that that was a 
 reasonable probability, and they nodded their heads affirmatively. But. 
 after a while, along conies a witness who says that his coal had been on 
 a siding and the company's coal on a siding, and that the company 
 received their coal and his coal did not come through. Then they tried 
 another tack and asked him. " Don't you know that if there is a 
 blockade, all the cars go on the siding in turn tine after the other; that 
 they run them in on the siding, and run those down first that went in 
 first, each staying an equal time on the siding.'" You recollect that. 
 gentlemen, and you see how utterly incompatible are these two
 
 75 
 
 attempted explanations. Well, then, they try to explain this thing in 
 their reports to their stockholders. They say there was a scarcity of 
 vessels in 1873 (that is in the Report of January. 1874), that five to 
 seven-thousand loaded cars were standing over daily, for months at a 
 time, at Port Richmond, owing to the scarcity of vessels. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, that must have been a very unusual scarcity of 
 vessels, so unusual that since 18-42, when this company went into 
 business, it had never happened before. And I put this very question 
 to a number of witnesses, who said that they had owned vessels and 
 had transported coal by vessels, whether there 'was any unusual 
 scarcity of vessels in 1873?"' They said, "No, nothing but what there 
 might have been every season." " But, there was nothing unusual?" 
 "No; nothing unusual." So this explanation is found to be untenable, 
 and not supported by the facts. Then the company's next explanation 
 was that there was no demand for coal. Why, gentlemen, we have 
 shown you that the retailers went to the operators to ask for coal; that 
 the operators had agreed to send the coal and that the factors had sold 
 the coal. Mr. Borda had vessels that he could not load, because he 
 could not get the coal. .Air. Borda had customers whose orders he 
 could not fill, because he could not get the coal; there was no scarcity 
 of demand as far as any of the witnesses were concerned, they all with 
 one accord, retailers, factors and operators, swore on the witness stand 
 before you that they could have sold more coal if they had had more 
 ears to bring it to market in the years 1873 and 1874. So that 
 attempted explanation fell to the ground. 
 
 Sirs, THE HEAL EXPLANATION is easy; the fact was that 
 THE SCHUYLKILL REGION HAD PRODUCED ITS QUOTA 
 AND therefore the Schuylkill region MUST STOP. That is the 
 explanation of it. Indeed, I may ask, what other explanation can be 
 given? The reports of the company show that in 1870. their coal 
 tonnage was -4.083,405 tons, the number of their cars was 19,420, and 
 there was a suspension for four and a half months ; consequently, in 
 seven and a half months of that year they transported the whole of 
 that 4,600,000 tons with 19,400 cars. 
 
 In 1871 their production was almost even 6,000,000 ton. their cars were 
 19,589 and they had four months' suspension. They had eight months 
 in which to transport, with 19,600 cars. 6,000,000 of tons of coal. In 
 1872 their coal tonnage was 0.185,-484 tons, their number of cars was 
 21,000, and there was no suspension, and they transacted their business
 
 76 
 
 without the slightest delay. But, in 1873 their coal tonnage was 
 6,546,000 tons ; they had 23,000 cars, and had all these blockades. If 
 they could transport four and a half millions with 19,000 cars in seven 
 and a half months, I think, gentlemen, they could have transported six 
 and a half millions of tons, with 4.000 more cars to do it with, in 
 twelve months. In 1874, when the blockades were worse still, they 
 transported 200,000 tons less of coal, and they had more care or the 
 same number with which to do it. Now, there is no explanation to be 
 found there. They had the cars ; their tonnage had not grown so 
 rapidly that their cars did not keep pace with it ; there was never a time 
 that their facilities were not kept equal to the demands of their traffic, 
 this company is too well managed to allow their facilities to get behind 
 their traffic. The only explanation was, that this region had filled the 
 agreement which the President of these companies had made for it 
 without the authority of the men of the region, and without asking 
 them anything about it. He, out of his own head and by virtue of the 
 power of these companies, had made that agreement for them and they 
 must abide by it ; and when they had filled their quota, they had to 
 stop. The company tell you that they could carry 200,000 tons of coal 
 per week, that their facilities were equal to this. This is true, but, 
 gentlemen, I do not think you will find in their tonnage report any four 
 weeks in the year, in which they carried 200,000 tons. I looked over 
 it carefully, and therefore say this advisedly. Now, when we got into 
 this inquiry, the despatchers were called ; and what do they say? They 
 say they made no discrimination as between individual operators. Why, 
 of course they did not. Can you imagine that gentlemen of the ability, 
 of the thorough knowledge of their business, that is possessed by the 
 managers of this road, would have put it into the power of fifteen, 
 twenty or twenty-five deputy sub-district despatchers, or whatever their 
 official title may be, to take away their charter. There can be no 
 offence committed by a common carrier higher than that of refusing 
 to carry when he has means, and certainly they would not have 
 told those men to make any discrimination between collieries, nor 
 would they have permitted it for one day if they had known that 
 any such discrimination was made; but the district despatchers and the 
 head despatcher himself could not distribute any more cars than they 
 had. If THEIR CARS TO THE NUMBER OF 10,000 were 
 strung along the line of their road and USED AS STORE-HOUSES 
 for the coal of the Coal and Iron Company, as was admitted on the
 
 77 
 
 stand by Mr. Wooten, their General Superintendent, they would have 
 only fifty per cent, of the cars of the region to distribute, and the 
 production would be stopped just to that extent. Well, sirs, the thing 
 was awkward. The region was completely under control ; but, in 
 making a blockade, in putting 10,000 cars along the track, there was a 
 great loss to the company. Of course there was ; and in attempting to 
 deny these detentions, they asked us, " would it not be ridiculous for us 
 to lose all this car service, if we could help it?" The answer is that 
 they either had to lose the car service, or decrease the price of their 
 coal ; and they preferred to lose the money on their tolls, and make it 
 up on the coal. IT WAS ONLY A QUESTION AS TO WHICH 
 POCKET IT WENT INTO— the right-hand side pocket of the 
 Reading Railroad Company, or the left-hand side pocket of the Coal and 
 Iron Company — that was all ; it was with them a mere matter of book- 
 keeping as to which side made the money, — whether it was to be 
 credited to tolls or to coal. Rut it was awkward, it was expensive, it 
 it was onerous, and therefore they formed THE COAL EXCHANGE, 
 so that thereafter this business of curtailing production, instead of being- 
 carried out by the act of the Reading Railroad Company, in making- 
 storehouses of its cars and keeping them standing loaded on its tracks, 
 and thereby curtailing the cars and the shipments, should be done there- 
 after by a committee. That was all, and that was the sole purpose of the 
 Coal Exchange. 
 
 Then, gentlemen, they say, "this combination is nothing; you have 
 it in every business; every rope, every tack, every smoke-stack and so 
 on that yuu buy is controlled by a combination." Well, now, that 
 may be, but those combinations are not the same as this one; there is 
 nothing in the world to prevent you or me, or either of us, from going 
 into any of these businesses. We can start a rope factory, if we please 
 and if we have money enough; we can start it anywhere we please, 
 and "the combination" cannot stop it; we can join "the combination" 
 or stay out, just as we please ; but as far as this business of coal is 
 concerned, these companies have the market by the throat, there is no 
 man that goes into the business but must send his product over their 
 lines ; there is no man that can go into the business, but must be 
 dependent upon them as to whether or not he succeeds ; and no man 
 can succeed in his individual capacity, where his production is to be 
 curtailed unless he joins with the combination of the curtailers. 
 
 Now THE LAW AGAINST SUCH A COMBINATION IS
 
 78 
 
 VERY PLAIN, and it is founded upon this very fact, that wherever 
 any combination controls the production, wherever it has the power to 
 keep other people out, then the natural and inevitable result is to 
 enhance the price and it becomes of itself illegal. In this case of the 
 Morris Run Coal Company, The Barclay Coal Company in 18 P. F. 
 Smith, p. 173, which has been so often cited, on page 183 the referee 
 uses some pertinent language. First, let me say that these corporations, 
 the Morris Run, the Barclay Coal Company and some others, controlled 
 two small regions of bituminous coal in the north-western part of Penn- 
 sylvania, called the Barclay and Blossburg regions— a matter which, 
 as compared with the anthracite coal region here in question, was of 
 little or no importance. They did have a monopoly of that region, 
 just exactly as these companies have a monopoly of the anthracite coal 
 region; the difference between them being that there are regions 
 without number of bituminous coal, that it can be found almost any- 
 where in the United States, that nobody can get the control of that 
 product for any more than a certain limited territory, while this com- 
 bination, in controlling this anthracite coal field of Pennsylvania, has 
 the whole of the known product of the world in their hands. Now, 
 this is what the referee says: 
 
 " These corporations represented almost the entire body of bituminous 
 coal in the northern part of the State. By combination between them- 
 selves they had the power to control the entire market in that district, 
 and they did control it by a contract not to ship and sell coal otherwise 
 than as therein provided. And in order to destroy competition they 
 provided for an arrangement with dealers and shippers of anthracite 
 coal. They were thereby prohibited from selling under prices to be 
 fixed by a committee representing each company. And they were ob- 
 liged to suspend shipments upon notice from an agent that their allotted 
 share of the mar/ret had been forwarded or sold." 
 
 For 'agent" read "committee" and you have exactly this combi- 
 nation. 
 
 " Instead of regulating the business by the natural laws of trade, to 
 ivit, those of demand and supply, these companies entered into a 
 league, by which they could limit the supply below the demand, in 
 order to enhance the price. Or, if the supply was greater than the 
 demand, they could nevertheless compel the payment of the price arbi- 
 trarily fixed by the joint committer. The restraint on the trade in 
 bituminous coal teas by this contract as wide and extensive as the
 
 79 
 
 market for the article. It already embraced the State of New York, 
 and loas intended and no doubt did affect the market in the Western 
 States." 
 
 Now, what was the reply to this? Indeed, gentlemen, if I had not 
 known the entire ability of the gentleman who appeared for the defence, 
 I would have thought that he had borrowed his defence here from the 
 very case I am now citing. I read from the opinion of Chief Justice 
 Agnew. 
 
 "The plaintiff in error's reply to this vigorous statement of the pur- 
 pose of the contract and its effect upon the public interest, alleges that 
 its true object was to lessen expenses, to advance the quality of the coal, 
 and to deliver it in the markets it was to supply, in the best order, to 
 the consumer." 
 
 It was all to tnke care of the consumer, you see ! 
 
 "This is denied by the defendants; but it SEEMS TO US IT IS IMMA- 
 TERIAL WHETHER THESE POSITIONS ARE SUSTAINED OR NOT. Ad- 
 mitting their correctness, it does not follow that these advantages redeem 
 the contract from the obnoxious effects so strikingly presented by the 
 referee. The important fact is that these companies control this 
 immense coal-field ; that it is the great source of supply of bituminous 
 coal to the. State of New York and large territories westward ;" and 
 in our case it is not only the great source of supply, but it is the only, 
 the exclusive source of supply, not to New York alone but to the 
 whole United States, "that by this contract they control the price of 
 coal in this extensive market, and make it bring sums it would not 
 command if left to the natural laws of trade; that it concerns an 
 article of prime necessity for many uses ; that its operation is general 
 
 in this large region, and affects all who use coal as a fuel; and th>s is 
 accomplished by a combination of all the companies engaged in this 
 
 branch of business in the large region where they operate. The combi- 
 nation is wide in scope, general in its influence, and injurious in its 
 
 effects. These being its features, the contract is against public policy, 
 
 illegal, and therefore void." 
 
 And again the Chief Justice says on page 186 : 
 
 -The effects produced on the public interests lead to the consideration 
 
 of another feature of great weight in determining the illegality of the 
 
 contract, to wit : the combination resorted to by these five companies. 
 
 Singly, each might have suspended deliveries and sales of coal to suit 
 
 its own interests, and might have raised the price, even though this
 
 80 
 
 might have been detrimental to the public interest. TJiere is a certain 
 freedom ichich must be allowed to every one in tlie management of his 
 own affairs. When competition is left free, individual error or folly 
 will generally find a correction in the conduct of others. But here is 
 a combination of all the companies operating in the Blossburg and 
 Barclay Mining regions, and controlling their entire production. They 
 have combined together to govern the supply and the price of coal in 
 all the markets from the Hudson to the Mississippi rivers, and from 
 Pennsylvania to the lakes. This combination has a power in its con- 
 federated form which no individual action can confer. The public 
 INTEREST MUST SUCCUMB TO IT, FOR IT HAS LEFT NO COMPETITION 
 FREE TO CORRECT ITS BALEFUL INFLUENCE. When the supply of 
 coal is suspended, the demand for it becomes importunate, and prices 
 must rise. Or if the supply goes forward, the price fixed by the con- 
 fede rates must accompany it. The domestic hearth, the furnaces of the 
 iron master, and the fires of the manufacturer, all feel the restraint, 
 while many dependent hands are paralyzed and hungry mouths are 
 stinted. The influence of a lack of supply, or a rise in the price of 
 an article of such prime necessity, cannot be measured. It permeates 
 the entire mass of the community, and leaves few of its members un- 
 touched by its withering blight. Such a Combination is more 
 than a Contract, it is an Offence." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, has it worked so in this case ? That is the question. 
 Why, let us try and see through this flimsy guise of sympathy for the 
 consumer under which the combination was formed. The producer 
 and consumer brought together — the middleman, the retailer and every- 
 body else dispensed with ! How glorious it will be : The producer will 
 sell so much the cheaper, and the consumer will get all the benefit. 
 Now, before the company was formed, everybody made his own price, 
 the collieries made their own prices. That was a matter of very con- 
 siderable objection to the road. Here is a reply made to one of the 
 gentleman who objected to going into the pool. He said, "I don't 
 believe in this thing ; I think I cau do my business better than you 
 can do it for me ; I have a good coal and an established market and I 
 can make my living." The President of the companies, rising and 
 endeavoring to explain why it was that he used the expression that 
 has been adverted to, says: "The conversation then drifted into a 
 more general discussion, in which I was annoyed to find that the old 
 idea that every single operator had better coal than his neighbor, had
 
 81 
 
 so possessed the minds of most who were present, that it seemed to me 
 that each one would be better satisfied in getting two dollars for his 
 coal, if his neighbor only got $1.75, than he would be in getting $3 
 for his coal, if his neighbor got the same." But the result of this 
 thing, gentlemen, is plainly that he does get 83 for his coal, and that 
 his neighbor gets the same ; you have no longer your choice between 
 SI. 75 and $2, but the whole thing has been arranged for you, and 
 you have Hobson's choice, to pay $3 or get none. 
 
 "Where are the manufacturers, where are the operators," the gentle- 
 man asks, "why do they not come forward and complain?" I tell you, 
 gentlemen, the names of the manufacturers were upon that petition 
 for this investigation. You yourselves saw them. And as far as the 
 operators are concerned, when they were asked why did they not com- 
 plain when they did not get cars, they said plainly, and they answered 
 most truly, "THE REASON WE DID NOT COMPLAIN WAS, 
 because we would rather stop the production of coal than that prices 
 should fall." No wonder they did not complain; no wonder they 
 were most unwilling witnesses. Every man in that trade who was 
 called before you testified that it was owing to this combination, and 
 to this combination alone, that there was a rise in the prices of coal. 
 Mr. Parrish says he would have been in bankruptcy but for the rise 
 in prices ; Mr. Thomas says the prices had raised, but he was making 
 money in 1872. How much he is making now I do not know, but I 
 do not wonder that he likes it. Then Mr. Neill said a good deal on 
 that subject also. When talking of this very business of a reduction 
 of cars and increase in prices, he was asked, : ' Now, if competition was 
 left entirely open and free, is it not your opinion, if each man were to 
 mine and sell his own coal himself or through a factor, would not the 
 tendency be to crowd out the poorer qualities of coal, and introduce 
 to the public better qualities. If it were not for the policy at present 
 pursued by the Reading Railroad Company and the Reading Coal and 
 Iron Company, in giving to parties wharves for such coals as they 
 controlled or mined, is it not your opinion that these poorer qualities 
 of coal would have been entirely crowded out of the market and better 
 qualities of coal would be now furnished to consumers ? " He answers 
 thus : " I think if there was no restriction in the production — " Now, 
 mind you, we have been asked here where was the restriction in pro- 
 duction, where was our testimony that this production had been stopped. 
 Why, sirs, it is there ; it is in this car detention. This Coal Exchange
 
 82 
 
 never stopped production, because at the time we took our testimony 
 they had not gone into active operation. They had formed it in 
 January, 1875, and in May and June, when the witnesses testified, 
 they had not commenced to mine, owing to the strike ; it was, as I 
 have said, simply to organize, to simplify, to reduce to something like 
 a system these car detentions, which were spoken of as a means of 
 stopping production, and which every one of these men speaks of as 
 a means of stopping production and keeping up and raising still higher 
 the price that this Coal Exchange was formed. But, to return to 
 Mr. Neill ; he says: "I think IF THERE WAS NO RESTRICTION 
 IN THE PRODUCTION, the price of coal would run down so 
 ] ow — if ea ch miner had as many cars as he could load with coal 
 to throw on the market — the condition of the market would be such 
 that the BEST COAL would not be worth more than A DOLLAR 
 AND A-HALP A TON at Port Carbon, while the POORER 
 COLLIERIES would have been SOLD OUT BY THE SHERIFF, 
 or bought by somebody at about ten per cent, of their value." 
 Now, that shows whether or not there had been any restriction in 
 production, and whether the prices had gone up. If the prices in 
 1872 had ruled in 1873-4, the coal trade, like other trades, would 
 have had to lessen their profits, decrease their expenses and lower their 
 prices, and the price would have gone, as Mr. Neill tells you, to $1.50 
 a ton. 
 
 Again, gentlemen, these differences in prices have all been leveled up. 
 You have been told there were differences as high as 75 cents a ton 
 between coals of different collieries. They say now — one of these ope- 
 rators, Mr. Thomas, says — " Now the purchaser must take the coal he can 
 o-et " You can understand how that is. There is only a certain 
 quantity mined so as to make sure that more will not be mined than is 
 wanted. Therefore, the last man that comes is the last man served, 
 and he is compelled to take that last unsold ton, whether it comes from 
 Wyoming or Schuylkill, whether it comes from Wilkesbarre or Pottsville. 
 It is all put together; and he has to take that ton of coal, whether it 
 is what he wants or not, and he has to pay the same price for it that 
 he would have paid if it had been from the very colliery he desired. 
 The difference in the company's prices, leaving out the three special 
 coals, which would always vary necessarily — 1 refer to the Franklin 
 and Lykens Valley coal and the Lorberry coal, each of which has a 
 special use of its own — the difference between those coals in March,
 
 83 
 
 1873, (and hardly two were alike,) was from $4.30 to $4.70, a 
 difference of forty cents a ton. But, in November, 1874, they were 
 all alike at $5.90 a ton, except one coal which was $5.95 a ton. They 
 had therefore decreased this difference between the collieries, and had 
 leveled the prices up to within five cents, and had made a maximum 
 increase at that time of $1.65 a ton. 
 
 Now, the cost to the country of this combination is a very hard 
 thing to estimate. You cannot take it from the retailers' prices, 
 because, as I have told you, they are as various as the retailers them- 
 selves; you cannot take it from the company's prices, because the 
 company never was in business until the time that they formed this 
 combination. Why, gentlemen, they had no sooner become miners, 
 than they found out all about this great trouble and expense of 
 mining. Before that, the enormous capital that was required to 
 develop the region, the great expense to be encountered, the dang?r to 
 life and property from the shot of the assassin, or the spark of the 
 locomotive — none of these things had had any terrors for them, and had 
 never interested them. Ihe dangers of bankruptcy and ruin, the fact 
 that gentlemen died without leaving wills and that the sheriff settled 
 people's estates in Schuylkill County, never startled them a bit. They 
 had their tonnage, and that was all that they wanted. But, when 
 they went into the business, they were determined to make it pay. 
 We have no data from them, prior to the beginning of 1873, and 
 therefore cannot tell how far they have raised the price of their own 
 coals, though they have raised the prices very considerably. But, the 
 prices at the Scranton auction sales are a complete index to the prices 
 of coal at other points, and for other coals, and to the effect of this 
 combination. Ordinarily the price of any product is about the same 
 at all points, that is to say, the cost of transportation from the place 
 where it is raised or mined, or manufactured, to the place where it is 
 sold, is added to the cost of raising or mining, or manufacturing the 
 product ; that is regulated by the ordinary laws of trade, and competi- 
 tion keeps the prices as nearly uniform as the distance which the 
 article is carried will permit. But, this is peculiarly and especially so 
 with coal, because, as the gentleman who appears here for the Reading 
 Companies has himself told you, the effect of this combination was to 
 make the price uniform at the mines, and gradually increasing accord- 
 ing to the distance which it was carried from the ' mines to the 
 consumer or purchaser. That is to say, the nearer the mines you buy
 
 84 
 
 coal, the lower the price, and the further from the mines you buy, the 
 higher the price, because, to the price at the mines is added the cost of 
 transportation. Therefore, these Scranton sales, by the ordinary laws 
 of trade, and especially by the rules introduced by this combination, 
 are an accurate test of the additions to the price of coal which have 
 been made by this combination. 
 
 In looking over this list of Scranton prices, (pp. 603 to GOT, of this 
 testimony), I took the trouble to make the averages of those prices for 
 1872, 73, and 74. In 1872, they averaged $3.70 per ton; in 1873, 
 they averaged $4.90 per ton. That was an advance of $1.20 a ton. 
 And in 1874, in the face of the depression in every other business, and 
 when everything else had decreased in price and in value, they further 
 increased the price to $5.13, or a further advance of 23 ceuts per ton. 
 In other words, in the course of two years working of this beautiful 
 machine, THEY HAD RAISED THE PRICE $1.43 A TON. 
 Now, to do that, they had to further reduce production in 1874. In 1 (-74. 
 they made their production 1,300,000 tons lessthan it was in 1873, because 
 they could not force the coal on the people at the price they had raised 
 it to. The public would go cold and hungry, because they could not 
 pay the price and, therefore, strong as was this combination, they were 
 compelled, in order to make that further advance of twenty-three cents 
 a ton in 1874, to shorten their production to market 1,300,000 tons. 
 
 They produced, in 1873, 22,823,000 tons and, in 1874, 21,510,000 
 tons. This combination cost the people of this country, in 1873, at an 
 average advance of $1.20 a ton, $27,387,000. No wonder these 
 gentlemen like their combination and cling to and attempt to defend it ! 
 And in 1874, with 1,300,000 tons of coal less to sell, they got 
 $3,000,000 more money for it, and made $30,768,000 out of the people 
 of this country. Why, sirs, talk about weights — talk about the alleged 
 shortage of some of these retail dealers — what is their alleged short- 
 weight in comparison with this? No wonder these gentlemen stick 
 together as a band of brothers ! No wonder these operators cannot be 
 induced to testify to anything that they do not personally see, and then 
 only when they have been asked about it over and over again in a 
 dozen different forms. 
 
 They talk about the bulk of coal to be handled, the risk to capital in 
 the business ; they talk about everything else directly and indirectly or 
 not connected at all with the coal business; but, they do not say one 
 word about the FIFTY-SEVEN MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT
 
 85 
 
 THEY HAVE MADE by this combination, and by this combination 
 alone, IN THE LAST TWO YEARS. That amount is based upon 
 the prices lor 1872. How much more it would have been in the face 
 of the depression of every other business, how much the prices for 
 L8Y3 and 1874, would have fallen below that of 1872, in sympathy 
 with the general decline in the prices and value of all other property, 
 and in the face of the fact that 1872 was by no means the lowest year 
 that the coal trade had gone through and had existed and had 
 succeeded, 1 cannot tell you; and no one can now know; the real 
 advance caused by this combination, in all probability is, at least, double 
 the amount I have stated, $57,000,0011. 
 
 No wonder that this Beading Railroad Company fight a legislative or 
 any other investigation in every way they can devise. This Reading 
 Railroad Company made in 1873, simply out of this rise produced by 
 this combination, $7,000,000, and in 187-4, with less coal, they made 
 $7,500,01)0; and this profit is certainly considerable enough to justify 
 their keeping their cars standing loaded on the tracks, so as to reduce 
 the production and bring in this profit. 
 
 Why, sirs, it is not to be wondered at that the learned counsel for 
 the defence when he comes to argue this case, travels out of the record 
 and speaks of everything else but the matter before you. 
 
 He has told you about his fifteen years experience in the coal region, 
 and then traveled off into a discussion of the labor question, but, that 
 question, as you will recollect, was expressly excluded from this case, 
 and you decided, properly no doubt, that it was not within the scope of 
 your authority to investigate. Whenever the word "labor" was men- 
 tioned by any of the witnesses, we were promptly met by the objection 
 of the learned counsel, and the testimony was under your ruling re- 
 jected, and, as this question is not before you and no testimony has been 
 given upon it, I will not further refer to it. 
 
 He has spoken upon the condition of the trade, the character of the 
 coal regions, the difficulties of mining and handling coal, the great bulk 
 of coal and the impossibility of storing it, the large capital required, the 
 risk that capital is at, the character of this Railroad Company and it's 
 employees, the discipline that is enforced among them, the manner in 
 which they are treated by the company, and in short upon every subject 
 under the sun, except the points at issue before you, and except the 
 advance in the prices of coal.
 
 86 
 
 That is the secret of this whole combination. 
 
 Speaking of this combination, he asks, " Why do you attack us, why 
 don't you go for some other of these companies instead of these 
 Reading Companies? 
 
 We answer that we attack these Reading Companies because, until 
 they became themselves purchasers of coal lands, and miners and sellers 
 of coal, until these Reading Companies came into this trade, and formed 
 and organized this combination, it was an absolute physical impossibility, 
 it never had been created, it could not be created. The coal trade had 
 commenced in 1820, and had gone to 1872 without it. For fifty-two 
 years, this trade, dreadful as it is, dangerous as it is, with all its evils, 
 had lived and succeeded. It had grown rich and had peopled the 
 valley of the Schuylkill, the valley of the Lehigh, the valley of 
 Wyoming. Why, gentlemen, the Railroad Company had done 
 none of this. It was all there and the Railroad Company came 
 in, not like a falcon, but like a cormorant, to take that which other 
 people had built. They had there everything to their hand. This 
 Philadelphia and Reading Railroad Company took hold of this thing 
 with an iron hand and, by the mere force of their power, in the years 
 1873 and '74, brought about this arrangement, made this combination 
 and caused this advance in the prices. This combination was suggested, 
 not by any one who had been connected with these coal companies, for 
 the long years the coal trade had been in existence, but, by the repre- 
 sentative of the Reading Companies as soon as they went into the business, 
 and the first thing that these companies did when they went into the 
 business was to form the combination. No wonder, therefore, they talk 
 about everything else but that! That is the reason why they have 
 been attacked; because, it is to them, and to them alone, that the 
 existing state of affairs is due. It was of their creation, their bringing 
 about, and but for them it could not have existed, and would not exist 
 to-day. The gentleman talks about the exactions of the middlemen, 
 about the exactions of the retailer, about the difference that twenty-five 
 cents a ton makes, and says that it makes the difference between 
 beggary and success. He asks whether we want to beggar the region ; 
 and asked my colleague in his opening, whether that gentleman thought 
 it would be a good thing to have Schuylkill County bankrupt. We do 
 not ask that; certainly not; and yet, neither do we want the Schuylkill 
 County coal companies to absorb $57,000,000 of the people's money 
 more than is a fair remuneration for their production of coal.
 
 87 
 
 Again, here is a company that owns almost all, certainly the larger 
 part of the Schuylkill coal region ; and if, as alleged, that region was 
 capable of so much over-production, if it was so difficult for them to 
 find a market for their product, if they were so unable to get the coal 
 out and put it in the hands of the consumer at a fair living profit, why 
 then did these companies start their improvement, the only one they 
 have started so far as I know, the great East Norwegian shaft? I 
 say, and I have a right to argue that it was for this reason, that 
 hereafter, as their collieries go on, they will, under the two colliery 
 rule that I have mentioned, take a larger and larger proportion 
 of the cars, they will have more and more of the production, 
 until finally the individual operators' production will come down to 
 almost one car in every hundred of his capacity. What then will 
 become of him? And, I ask you, gentlemen, who represent the county 
 of Philadelphia, WHAT IS TO BECOME OF YOUR VALUABLE 
 GIRARD LANDS, when that state of things is brought about? I say 
 that this alleged over-production is no explanation, and that there has 
 been no explanation of this combination, that there is nowhere given a 
 full and complete answer to the objections to it, that there has not been 
 at any time stated to you any reason for making this combination, other 
 than such as existed at the time that these gentlemen, with their eyes 
 open and a full knowledge of the subject, concluded to go into the 
 business of mining and selling coal, and did go into that business. 
 And I say to you that, • whether any reason for it existed or not, there is 
 no fair justification or excuse for these six corporations, whether owned 
 in New York or in England, to FLEECE THE PEOPLE of this 
 country to the extent OF THIRTY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
 A YEAR, 
 
 Now, where is all this going to end ? This company started by 
 saying they were going to give us coal at moderate prices, that the 
 benefit was all for the consumer, and that they were going to bring 
 the producer and consumer together. I have shown you something 
 about what " moderate prices" are. If in 1872 they could sell their 
 coal at S3. 70 and make money — and some of them did make money, 
 there is no doubt about that, they testified to it, they admitted that 
 they did ; if that was a fair price and no more than a fair price, taking 
 it as a minimum basis, why did they not keep to it or, if they wanted 
 to run it up a little, in order to cover some poor man, who they thought 
 was entitled to make more than his ordinary share of money out of
 
 8S 
 
 the community, why did they not stop when they had run it up to 
 25 cents a ton higher, the figure about which they have talked so 
 much ? They claimed that they went into the commission business, or 
 this "pool" arrangement, to keep down the prices, and that they 
 could and would do this business for ten cents a ton ; but I have 
 shown you that in this business, which they got control of by doing 
 it so cheap that they at first lost 30 cents a ton, they now make 50 
 cents a ton, or double the profit that was ever made before, and double 
 that which they themselves assert to have been exorbitant and 
 extortionate, when made by the factors or middlemen. 
 
 They say they want a moderate profit and while in that connection 
 and in the same breath, they assert that an advance on the prices of 
 1872 was necessary, that 25 or 30 cents per ton more was required to 
 save the coal region from bankruptcy and ruin, and they ask you 
 whether it is not better that that small advance should be made, than 
 that such a calamity as the bankruptcy of a large region should happen. 
 
 I have shown you from the testimony and even by their own ad- 
 missions made at the time, that the prices of 1872 were remunerative 
 and the coal trade prosperous; but admitting it was not, what justifi- 
 cation is there for this further amount they have raised the prices of coal. 
 If an advance of 25 or 30 cents would save the region, would make 
 all the difference between beggary and success, as the gentleman has 
 said, why raise the price more than a dollar over a fair profit, why 
 raise the price $1.43 per ton, when 30 cents at the utmost, according 
 to their own account, was all that was required. 
 
 I have shown you that they have put it up to $1.43 per ton higher, 
 aud I ask WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO STOP? 
 
 Formerly there was a system of commissions and drawbacks on con- 
 tracts, and a great many ways by which an operator could sell coal to 
 the manufacturer or individual for something less than the market 
 prices. If you look at their agreements, at this agreement of the 
 Coal Exchange and the programme, as it is called, of the New York 
 Companies, you will see that every one of those ways is now closed, 
 that there is now absolutely no way by which any man can buy a 
 pound of coal, except at the regular circular or monthly prices; and 
 even when he buys it by the year he must buy it at a certain average, 
 formed by taking the average of their regular monthly advances in 
 the prices, and these monthly advances are all as regular as clock work, 
 as regularly as the month comes round the price advances. You must
 
 89 
 
 have coal and these companies tell you they have it all, and fix the 
 price you must pay for it ; and that amount you must pay or else you 
 go without. THEY CAN EXTORT WHAT THEY PLEASE; they 
 can make the price to suit themselves. It does seem to me, gentlemen, 
 upon the face of this testimony and exhibits, and upon what you your- 
 selves know as experienced business men, of the necessary and universal 
 effect of a monopoly of this kind ; that it is the duty of the legis- 
 lature to do something to stop this great and crying evil, and that it is 
 your duty so to report to them. You have been appointed to investi- 
 gate — what ? Whether or not these Philadelphia and Reading Companies 
 had any chartered right to do what they do, that is to say, to engage 
 in the mining and selling of coal. That is certainly a matter of very 
 grave doubt. It is, however, a question of law and for the Courts to 
 determine, but it is your duty to direct that it shall be brought 
 before the Courts, and to direct your law officer, the Attorney General 
 of the Commonwealth, to obtain a writ of quo warranto and inquire 
 by what authority this company claims the franchises it has usurped. 
 
 You have been appointed to inquire as to ansther matter, a matter 
 of fact. What ? Whether these Philadelphia and Reading Companies 
 have combined with others to coutrol the prices and production of 
 coal. This you must answer affirmatively. They stand before you 
 and admit it. It is shown in every line of the testimony and of the 
 exhibits. It is not denied. You must so report to the legislature ; 
 and gentlemen, you must report too, that A MONOPOLY SUCH 
 AS THIS IS INJURIOUS TO THE PUBLIC, in that "IT 
 BRINGS THE GENERAL PROFIT INTO A PRIVATE 
 HAND," aud that "THE END OF IT IS BEGGARY AND 
 BONDAGE."
 
 Programme op the Combination of the Six Coal Producing 
 Companies for the Years 1873 and 1874. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 25.85 
 
 2,585,000 
 
 15.98 
 
 1,588,000 
 
 16.15 
 
 1,615,000 
 
 18.37 
 
 1,837,000 
 
 13.80 
 
 1,380,000 
 
 9.85 
 
 985,000 
 
 The Committee, F. B. Gowen and Thomas Dickson, report the follow- 
 ing plan for the government of the trade to competitive points : 
 
 1. Tonnage to competitive points for ten months, from February 1 
 to November 30, 1874, inclusive, to be ten millions tons, and to be 
 distributed among the six interests in the same proportion as that 
 adopted in February, 1873, for the business of last year, viz : 
 
 To the 
 Philadelphia and Reading R. R. Co., 
 Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 
 N. J. Central R. R. Co. int., 
 Delaware and Hudson Canal Co., 
 Delaware, Lackaw'na and W. R. R. Co. 
 Pennsylvania Coal Co., . 
 
 Total, .... . 10,000,000 
 
 2. That a Standing Committee of six, composed of one repre- 
 sentative of each interest, be appointed for the season, to meet 
 monthly, or oftener, at the call of the chairman, to determine prices 
 and all questions relative to tonnage to competitive points, and to have 
 power, from time to time, to permit an increase or require a curtail- 
 ment of shipments to competitive points, with a view of regulating the 
 relative demand and supply; provided, that any increase or diminution 
 of shipments be based upon the percentage of allotment above men- 
 tioned, so that each interest shall be entitled to its proper proportion 
 of the aggregate competitive tonnage, whatever the same may be. It 
 is recommended that prices shall open in March, 1875, at an average 
 of fifteen cents per ton above the opening price of 1873, and there- 
 after advance as follows : say, in April, five cents ; May, ten cents ; 
 June, ten cents ; and July, August, September, October and Novem- 
 ber, each fifteen cents ; and that season prices be established so as not 
 to be more than thirty cents below the average of the year. The 
 prices to be established so as to admit the white ash coals of the 
 Reading Railroad Company, Lackawanna, Scranton, Wilkesbarre and 
 Pittston coals upon equal terms to customers in New York harbor. It
 
 91 
 
 being understood that any interest may demand for any or all of its 
 coal a higher price than that agreed upon by the Committee. 
 
 3. In establishing prices it is understood that they be fixed at the 
 respective shipping ports of Port Richmond, Elizabeth. Port Johnston, 
 South Amboy, Hoboken, Weehawken, Newburgh and Rondout, and 
 that no freights, deliveries or demurrages be guaranteed by any party, 
 except with the previous approval of the Committee of Six. 
 
 4. No commission whatever to be allowed upon coal sold at yearly 
 prices, and no contracts at yearly prices to be made with any one but 
 consumers and retailers, and then only upon the condition that all 
 cargoes of coal so sold shall be received by the purchaser and taken 
 upon the wharf, and not sold or transferred afloat. No sizes to be 
 sold at yearly or season prices except lump, steamboat, broken, egg 
 and chestnut, and egg only to consumers. No commissions exceeding 
 fifteen cents per ton to be allowed to any party buying at monthly 
 circular prices, and then only to such as purchase at least 25,000 tons 
 of coal per annum. 
 
 5. All coals sold at yearly or season prices to be sold by written 
 contracts, deliverable in equal monthly proportions, beginning either 
 on the 1st of March or 1st of April, and ending any time after the 
 1st of November, and any failure to take all or any of one month's 
 proportion to work a forfeiture pro tanto of each succeeding month's 
 proportion. 
 
 6. All deliveries of coal upon monthly allotments, at monthly 
 circular prices, to be charged at the circular price current in the month 
 in which the delivery is made, and under no circumstance whatever 
 shall coal, delivered in one month, be charged at the circular price of 
 any preceding month, unless the purchaser had a vessel at the shipping 
 port ready to receive such coal before the expiration of the month in 
 which the delivery was to be made. 
 
 7. The terms of contract for the sale of coal at season prices and 
 by monthly allotments at circular prices to be approved by the Com- 
 mittee of Six. 
 
 8. No allowance to be made for impurity of coal, imperfection in 
 preparation, short weight, or any other reason, without the approval of 
 the Committee of Six, to whom all such claims are to be reported. 
 
 9. The Committee of Six to have power to call for monthly or 
 other reports for each interest upon any subject over which tney have 
 control, and to have authority, if they desire, to examine the sales and 
 tonnage books and accounts of any company or corporation.
 
 Constitution, By-Laws and Agreement with the 
 Combined Anthracite Coal Mining and Carrying 
 Companies of the Schuylkill Coal Exchange, as 
 offered in Evidence before the Legislative Com- 
 mittee appointed to Enquire into certain Acts 
 of the P. & R. R. R., and P. & R. C. & I. Co's. by 
 Joint Resolution of the Legislature of Pennsyl- 
 vania of 1875. 
 
 Article 1. This Association shall be called and known as the Schuylkill 
 Coal Exchange, and its object shall be to preserve uniformity in the price of 
 Coal and to transact all business bearing on the trade generally. 
 
 Second. This Association shall be composed of the individuals, firms and 
 corporations, who are engaged in mining Coal in the Schuylkill region, and 
 who shall have signed the Constitution and By-Laws. 
 
 Third The officers of the Association shall be a President, Vice President 
 and Secretary, who shall also act as Treasurer. 
 
 Fourth. The said officers shall be elected by ballot on the last Thursday 
 of each year, together with a committee of nine, which committee shall meet 
 monthly to establish a minimum price for each and every size of Coal for the 
 month following for the line and city trade, and shall also have full power 
 and authority to curtail the shipments or stop the production if necessary — 
 providing that all curtailments or stoppages shall bear equally on all collie- 
 ries — or transact any other busiuess which may be for the general interest of 
 the operators. Said officers and committee shall serve for the ensuing year 
 or until others are chosen. 
 
 Fifth. In case of a vacancy occurring in the office of President, Vice Presi- 
 dent or Treasurer, such vacancy shall be filled by the Association at a special 
 meeting, and in case of a vacancy in the committee, the remaining members 
 of the committee shall have power to fill the vacancy. 
 
 BY-LAWS. 
 
 Article 1. The annual meeting of the Association shall be held on the 
 last Thursday in December in each year, at 10 o'clock A. M., at such place as 
 hereafter agreed upon, due notice of which shall be given by the Secretary 
 to each member. 
 
 Second. The committee on line and city prices meet monthly at the office 
 of the Philadelphia and Reading Coal and Iron Company, at 12 o'clock, m. 
 
 Third. Special meetings may be called by the committee at the request of 
 two or more members, by giving three days notice thereof to all members, in 
 which the object of the meeting must be stated. 
 
 Fourth. Every individual, firm or corporation, who is a member, shall be 
 entitled to cast one vote for every 50,000 tons and fraction thereof shipped by 
 him or them in the previous year, provided that every individual, firm or 
 corporation carrying on a colliery and being a member of this Association 
 shall have at least one vote, and a majority shall decide any question. 
 
 Fifth. No person who is not a member^ or who does not represent a mem- 
 ber, or who is not invited by a vote of the Association, shall be present, and 
 take part in any meeting.
 
 93 
 
 Sixth. The Secretary after each meeting shall give notice to each colliery 
 which is not represented of the resolutions adopted by the Association at 
 that meeting. 
 
 Seventh. The ordinary expenses of the Association shall be defrayed by 
 levies made from time to time by the committee, who shall render an account 
 once a year or whenever desired by the Association, of its receipts and ex- 
 penditures. 
 
 Eighth. Any amendment to these By-Laws must be proposed at one stated 
 meeting and acted upon at the next. A majority shall adopt the same, except 
 upon a call for immediate action, at which time two-thirds of the votes of the 
 members present shall be required to adopt the same. 
 
 Ninth. The President or, in his absence, the Vice President, shall call the 
 meeting to order. The Secretary shall call the roll of members, and read 
 the minutes of last meeting for amendment or adoption, when reports of com- 
 mittees will be heard, uufinished business introduced, and a general inter- 
 change of views and opinions on questions of interest to the Association. 
 
 Tenth. We do hereby agree that the action of the combined companies 
 shall govern all coal for competitive points that goes to Port Richmond for 
 shipment, and all that is shipped by way of the Schuylkill canal, and con- 
 signed to points upon or through the line of the Delaware and Raritan canal 
 for the shipping season of 1875, and we do hereby agree to abide by such 
 action, and do empower the President or Vice President of the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Coal and Iron Company to represent us in the premises, and 
 pledge ourselves to do all things necessary to carry out the same. 
 
 Eleventh. For the government of the line and city trade, we do hereby 
 adopt and agree to observe, and faithfully bind ourselves by the following 
 rules, conditions and restrictions in the sale of coal in the line and city 
 trade. 
 
 Article 1. A minimum price shall be established as above stated for each 
 and every size of coal to be fixed at Port Carbon, and to be in force for the 
 month following for the line and city trade, which will include all points in 
 the vicinity of Philadelphia, reached by cars and canal, and no coal shall be 
 sold below the price fixed. The line trade is to include all points reached 
 directly by the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, and all branches under 
 its control, the canal, the Wilmington and Reading Railroad, Reading and 
 Columbia Railroad, Lebanon Valley Railroad, and Schuylkill and Susque- 
 hanna Railroad, including Harrisburg, Lancaster and Columbia, unless any 
 of said points be exempted by order of the committee. 
 
 Second. All coal shall be sold at the shipping point on the Philadelphia 
 and Reading Railroad and canal, and no contract shall be made for future 
 delivery except at the monthly prices. 
 
 Third. Whenever coal is shipped according to orders, and is refused by 
 the consignee, no coal is to be sold to the party so refusing until he or they 
 shall have paid to the consignor all losses or expenses arising from the trans- 
 fer and resale of such coal. The facts thereof shall at once be reported by 
 the consignor to the president of the committee on prices, who shall have 
 power to appoint, if necessary, an inspector, whose report shall be laid by 
 the president before the committee for its further action thereon. 
 
 Fourth. All bills for coal are payable on or before the tenth day of the 
 month following that in which the coal is shipped, but no penalty shall be 
 attached for non-payment until after the 20th. Interest shall be added on 
 all coal sold on time from the first day of the month following that in which 
 the coal is delivered at the shipping point for shipment by railroad and from 
 date of bill of lading for shipment by canal. 
 
 Fifth. Prices at Schuylkill Haven by railroad and canal shall be eight (8) 
 cents per ton more than from Port Carbon, and by canal at Port Clinton 
 twenty (20) cents per ton more than from Poat Carbon.
 
 94 
 
 Sixth. While we bind ourselves in honor to honestly and faithfully carry 
 out the above resolutions, we further agree to allow no commission, abate- 
 ment or deduction from the monthly circular rates, nor allow any agent or 
 middle interest to divide his or their commissions or profits with any manu- 
 facturer, dealer or consumer, or make any allowance or concession in price 
 from the monthly rates for any cause whatever. 
 
 Seventh. Operators are requested to report to any member of the com- 
 mittee the names of parties not strictly complying with the above rules and 
 regulations. 
 
 Wm. H. Johns & Bro., Eagle and Monitor Collieries. 
 
 John Donaldson, President Girard Mammoth Coal Co. 
 
 John Anderson & Co., Union Colliery. 
 
 Audenried, Norton & Co., Hazel Dell and Continental. 
 
 Owen, Eckel & Colket, Colket and West End. 
 
 Herman Hamburger, President Bear Ridge Coal Co. 
 
 S. M. Heaton & Co., Cuyler. 
 
 T. Garretson, Girard. 
 
 Miller Hoch & Co., Stanton. 
 
 Isaac May & Co., Burnside. 
 
 Moodie Gross & Co., Hammond, Girardville and Morris. 
 
 Heim & Goodwill, Bear Valley and George Fales. 
 
 Neal & M'Creary, Shenandoah City. 
 
 Patterson, Llewellyn & Co., Big Mountain. 
 
 Miller, Graeff & Co., Lorberry. 
 
 Levi Miller & Co., Lincoln. 
 
 Focht, Whittaker & Co., East Mabanoy. 
 
 W. H. Whittaker & Co., Diamond. 
 
 George W. Cole, Tunnel Ridge. 
 
 Richard Hecksher & Co., Kohinoor. 
 
 Wm. Montelius, Stuartville. 
 
 St. Nicholas Coal Co., per John Donaldson, St. Nicholas. 
 
 Wiggau & Triebels, Bear Run. 
 
 Haas, Brenizer & Co., Turkey Run. 
 
 Jeremiah Taylor & Co., Big Mine Run. 
 
 W. H. Lewis, Superintendent Wm. Penn Colliery. 
 
 Fry, Shoemaker & Co., Newkirk. 
 
 B. B. Thomas, President Thomas Coal Co. 
 
 S. Atkinson & Co., Delano Colliery. 
 
 Schall & Donahoe, Kentucky Colliery. 
 
 D. S. Althouse, for Hickory Shaft and Hickory Coal Co., Draper Collieries. 
 
 The Philadelphia and Reading C. & I. Co., per Geo. de B. Keim, V. P. 
 
 Douty and Baumgardner, Benj. Franklin. 
 
 H. Gawthrope, sales agent. 
 
 Thomas Baumgardner & Co., Reliance. Colliery. 
 
 Guiterman & Gorman, Greenback Colliery. 
 
 Thomas Baumgardner, President Enterprise Coal Co., Enterprise Colliery. 
 
 Graeber Kempel & Co., Locust Gap Colliery. 
 
 J. Claude White, Swatara Collieries. 
 
 Wm. Brown, Lambert Colliery. 
 
 Lloyd, Glover & Co., Phoenix Park, No. 3. 
 
 Lawrence Merkel & Co., Lawrence.
 
 HOW THE COAL OP THE EETAIL DEALERS 
 
 WAS WEIGHED BY THE EMPLOYEES OF 
 
 THE PHILADELPHIA AND READING 
 
 RAILROAD COMPANY. 
 
 N. B. — All these weights were admitted to have been made SECRET- 
 LY— W THE CELLAR. 
 
 Extract from the Testimony: 
 
 William Cheeseman, sworn : 
 
 Mr. Gowen examining. 
 
 Q. What is your business ? 
 
 A. It is that of a public weigher. 
 
 Q. Those certificates are the ones you issued at the time for that 
 weight ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were they alj carefully and accurately weighed ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you get all the coal into the bags ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You are confident of that? 
 
 A. I am satisfied we got all the coal and in some instances a little 
 dust. We could not gather it all up unless we got gravel stones — yet 
 we gathered it very clean. 
 
 Certificate of Weight of Stove Coal. 
 
 Weighed for James Tully. 
 
 Delivered to No. 100 Center street, Germantown. 
 
 10 bags- 2265 lbs. gross. 
 28 " tare. 
 
 2237 " net. 
 
 CHEESEMAN & AMES.
 
 96 
 
 James C. Tully, sworn : 
 
 Q. [By Mr. Gowen.] What was done with the coal ? 
 
 A. It was delivered to my house. 
 
 Q. Was it weighed ? 
 
 A. Yes; I will state that, after it was weighed, two buckets full 
 of coal were picked up. 
 
 Q. [By Mr. Lane.] Those buckets full were not weighed ? 
 
 A. No ; I asked him what the amount of the weigh master would 
 be ; I thought there would be some waste ; and he said there would be 
 some waste of course in handling it ; I had orders not to touch the 
 coal ; I had been out of coal for a long while, and so I went down 
 cellar and picked up two buckets full of coal after it had been weighed. 
 
 Q. [By Mr. Gowen.] Was not this coal dumped where there had 
 been some coal before ? 
 
 A. No ; my cellar had been cleaned.
 
 L*3Kr^
 
 IINIVFRRrTV OF II I INOIS-URRANA 
 
 3 0112 061575293 
 
 
 
 •*;•*% 
 
 
 »% >% 
 
 ^ W- ..' 3f<-* 
 
 .Wfr^fc 
 
 v> 
 
 
 **s**** 
 
 f* 3-S*4 4f^