St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-08-31
A FAMOUS CASE.

The case which has just been ar
gued in st. Paul, to determine
whether the Great Northern Railway
company has the right, under its
charter and under the laws of Min
nesota, to enter into the proposed ar
rangement for the reorganization of
the Northern Pacific, is probably the
most important ever occurring in
the Northwest, and one of the most
important in the history of railroad
litigation in this country. We pre-
statement of the questions at issue
Aetween the two parties to the suit,
IF the arguments on which each rests
Its case, and of the points that must
be decided by the court. All of these
are much simpler in themselves,
otripped of the wealth of legal illus
ration with which they have been
3lrrounded, than one might suppose,
-Sld comprehensive to the lay mind;
% that the case is one which every
seader may follow with ease.
One principal feature of the hear
ing has been the disclosure which it
hecessitated of the exact nature of
the agreement which it is proposed
shall be concluded between the two
railway systems. This has been
spoken Of commonly as a. consoIida-
ton, amounting to virtual union
under one mana cement. Into what
1t might develop, at a later day, if
permitted, it is of course impossible
to say. AS presented now, it is in
form close traffic agreement, for
more economical operation. The ar
rangement is that the tracks and
terminal facilities of the Northern
Pacific road shall be available for
the Great Northern, so that new con-
struction may be avoided. There
would be through billing of passen-
gers and freight, and free inter
change of traffic facilities as if the
roads constituted one system. In
consideration of this the Great
Northern would guarantee the in
terest on the bonded debt of the
Northern Pacific to the amount of
e6,2OO,OO0 per annum, and would
receive and hold 100000 of it's
stock.
The parties who have gone into
court to put a stop to the consum-
nation Of this plan rely on the laws
passed by the legislatures of this state
in 1874 and in 1881, forbidding the
purchase by one road of the stock
Of another, and the consolidation of
competing lines. This is the main
strength of their case. The Great
Northern's attorneys have two argu-
ments in reply. They hold, first, that
the charter under which their svs,
tenn operates and which was granted
In 1856 cannot be so amended as to
interfere with vested rights under it
Those Which they now desire to ex-
ercise they claim to have become sc
vested. They assert, dn the second
place, that the arrangement contem.
plated is not a. consolidation in the
sense prohibited by law. These are
the questions that the court must
decide. Did the original charter OF
1886 create vested rights which the
legislation of 1874 and thai
OF 1881 would interfere with
and invalidate? Is the agree
ment outlined between the tw,
systems one which would SO com.
within the meaning and effect O,
the laws passed in those years a.
to be prohibited? Must a so-callet
vested right be actually exercised in
order to become vested; or is it de
stroyed by legislation inimical to i
before it has been exercised prac
ideally? Mighty interests hang on tn,
decision of these questions, concern
ing which public opinion will b,