Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-03-28
WESTERN UNION.
Several Nice Points OF Law Decided I'm
the Re II Injunction Suit.

New York, March 27-In the Supreme
Court this morning Judge freeman rendered
an elaborate opinion in the suit OF Josiah
Z. Riff against the Western Union and Mu-
tual Union Telegraph Companies and Others,
in which he grants the motion to continue
the temporary injunction. The srit was
brought TO restrain the copsolidatio be-
tween the Mutual and the Western Union
Companies, BY which the latter was to lease
the lines Of the former oompsny. Judge
Freeman lays down certain conditions 10 be
observed, however. II is argued, he save, that
inasmuch "a the purpose of the lease is 10
create and maintain a monopoly of the tele.
graphic business, it is contrary to public
policy. IL this question were to De deter
mined on The general principles PHILOSOPHY
or the rules OF common law, there would be
great force IN the argument; but it is for the
lawn sking power OF State TO define what
the puolic policy on a given point
shall be. l must hod that under the
act OF 1870, the Western Union possesses the
power 10 lease the lines in question. The
ne II question, then, as whether the lease as
made calls for the interposiiion OF the Court.
The plaintiff insists that the lease is void
under the constitution and laws OF Peunsyl-
vania ana two other States. Oaly the con
stitution and laws Of Pennsy lvanis were laid
before me, and from them il does appear
that the consolidation of telegraph compa-
ules is not lawful in that State, but the con-
stiiution and statutes eff State can have no
extra territorial effect, and hence it is grave
question whether they can be enforced against
companies org anized under and in pursuance
OF the laws of any ether State aud having
power to consolidate at: home; but it rem aims
10 be sen whether there was anything in
the manner in, and C rcumstances under,
which the lease was entered into wbi n gave
the psiniif standing in court. The plaintiff
complains that the Western Union Com
pany legally consolidated with the Atlantic
and Pacific Telegraph Company and Amer
lean Ulion Telegraph Company; thai in con-
sequence thereof the capilal stock of III.
Western Union was illeg ally Increased from
about $40 100000 to about $50 ,000, 900, and
that such consolidation and Increase of stock
had ben sdjudged illegal. All these points,
Judge freeman ssys, are negstivsd by the
sfitaviis on the part of the defendant, and
ne further states that it is not true that the
courts have denied the power of the Western
U nion 10 consolidate with the comp anies re-
ferred to, or TO increase its stock. One point
raised by the plaintiff ia that the Western
Union failed to comply with the act of 1870
ia not calling a general meeting OF its stock
holders and OBJ, aiming the consent of three
6iths per cent. Of them TO the proposed con-
solidatlon with the Mutual Union at such
meeJi1g. Judge freeman decides that such
failure was defect in the proceedings,
and although one. that plaintiff is entitled TO
have the ipjunc ion continued during the
pending Of the action; but that the defendant
should have power to convene a general
meeting Of lis stockholders aud obtain the
consent 81 three ffths of Them TO a consolida-
ton, and that me defendant, on showing
proof of having done this, may APP
ply for dissolution OF the injunction.