Critics of the Corporation have charged that the Hill lease was entered into with a view of giving the big company a practical monopoly of the ore reserves of the country. Those responsible for the deal have strongly asserted that their sole object was to ensure an adequate ore reserve for the future. The question resolves itself into one of motives and is therefore not susceptible of proof. But whatever were the motives of the Steel Corporation’s management the fact remains that, according to the opinions of the best-qualified experts outside the Corporation itself, the big company, at the time the lease was made, did not have a supply of ore such as its vast output demanded, and probably does not now have such a necessary supply although it has acquired large reserves in Cuba and elsewhere. Further, it is doubtful if, outside of the Hill holdings, a large enough reserve of commercially available ore is to be obtained in the United States. The claim that the royalties paid under the Hill lease were too high is supported by the undisputed fact that royalties paid on other ore deposits in the same territory at the time of the signing of the contract were much lower than those paid under the lease by the Corporation. Unusual conditions governed this transaction, however. The lessors were well aware of the Corporation’s need of ore and that they were probably the only ones in a position to fill this need. They were therefore able to drive a hard bargain. The price originally demanded by Mr. Hill and his associates, it is understood, was one dollar a ton and it took some years’ negotiations before a price which both parties to the matter would accept could be arrived at. What was the reason for the cancellation of the lease? It is generally thought that the directors of the Corporation were impelled to their decision by the report of Commissioner of Corporations Herbert Knox Smith, who conducted a searching investigation into the Corporation’s activities and severely criticized the lease, and by the fear that it would be made much of by the Federal Government in its suit for the dissolution of the “Steel Trust.” This suit, it is true, had not actually been filed when the lease was abandoned; but it was so imminent that the Corporation’s directors must have believed it was about to be instigated. And these considerations did have weight in bringing about the decision. But the more cogent reason was a purely business one--the lease had not proved as profitable as had been hoped. The iron content of the Hill ores had not measured up to expectations, the cost of concentrating the ore proved too high, and on the whole the deal had become rather a burden than otherwise to the lessee.