The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1886-01-22
AND DEMOCRAT BLOOMSBURY, COLUMBIA COUNTY, PA.

that the purchase Of the stock OF a
parallel or competing line is not a.
mong the things prohibited, is met by
the declaration that 1T is too plain to
bear argument that the ownership of
the stock Of a corporation carries with
II the control of the corporation.
The Court says it is unable to adopt
the view Of the defendants that "the
fact of the traffic contracts should not
be taken into consideration and that as
the line of the South Pennsylvania
does not itself extend to Pittsburg, we
must conclude that the corporation
does not own or control parallel or
competing line" AS TO the argument
of the defendants that the South Penn
sylvania was not in competition
with any other road because it has
only been partially constructed, the
Court holds that the word slime in the
provision forbiddng any railroad cor
pora,ion to in "any way control any
other railroad corporation
having under its control parallel or
competing line,' was employed ad.
visedly aud that it denotes the route of
an intended railroad. 'The purpose
undoubtedly was to promote compe-
tition In railroad traffic
During the argument counsel in.
voked the aid of the undoubted gen
eral principle that the ownership of
shares Of stock, as Of other property
carries with it the legal right TO sell,
and contended that the owners of the
shares of the South Pennsylvania
Railroad Company could not legally be
restrained from so doing, and that an
injunction against the purchase would
have this effect. We do not think
the principle applies to this case. We
are not called upon to express any
opinion as to the righ' { TIE individ
ual shareholders TO sell their several
shares bonafde in the open market.
This, so far as they are concerned, is
an intended sale in combination for the
express purpose Of enabling them to
abandon the rights and duties con-
ferred and imposed upon them by the
act Incorporating the company and of
putting the control of their corporation
into the hands of its rival. This is an
act contrary TO the pnblic policy of the
State, which they have no right to
do.
"But as our purpose here is to show
merely that the parties to this trans.
action were not dealing with a purely
private matter we will not pursue this
subject further, nor are we now con-
cerned with the question whether there
be power in the courts to compel the
construction of railroad by a corpo-
ration which has undertaken it.
What we here decide is simply that
the corporators have no such right TO
sell their stock as can in any way in
terfere with the granting of all injunc-
tion to prevent competing corpora
tion from obtaining control of the
corporation charged with the duties
of its construction.
The opinion of Judge Mcpherson in
the Beech Greek case continues the
injunction against the Pennsylvania
Railroad and Northern Central Rail
road Companies, restraining them
from buying the Beech Creek Rail
road, and dissolves it as TO the other
defendants in the case. The South
Penn and Beech Greek Railroad people |
can dispose of their interests in their
lines, but it must be to others than the
Pennsylvania Railroad Company,
Bridgeport and Bedford and Northern
Central Railroad Companies, who are
prohibited from buying.