St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-08-31
IN JUDGE sANB0RN,s HANDS.
Attorneys in the Case Finish

Attorneys in the Case Finish
Their Arguments.
The arguments in the injunction suit
Of Thomas w. Pearsall, to restrain
the Great Northern from consum-
mating the proposed deal to gain con-.
troll of the Northern Pacific, were con-
cluded yesterday afternoon shortly
after 8 o'clock, and Judge Sanbofn.
has taken the case under consider
alton. Interest in the arguments had
so far declined that the attendance;
of attorneys in the court room was
much smaller than on the preceding
days. Much of the talk yesterday,
in fact most of 1t, was simply repeti-
ton of what has been said before.
But one incident during the entire
day relieved the monotony and lent
spirit to the hearing, and this was q
remark made by Judge Young with
reference to the comment that the
suit was a friendly one. ..y4;,.
There has been a great deal Of
speculation on this point by the pub
.lilc generally, some venturing the
opinion that President Hill, baked by
Ives in his attempt to gain control
Of the Northern Pacific, had in
spired the present suit with a view
Of letting himself down easy should
the court hold. that the deal was
unlawful, or being aided in his scheme
should the court hold the reverse. The
array of counsel representing the
Great Northern and the manner in
which they have handled+the case
in every detail, shows that as far
as the defense was concerned the
object was to win. The theory that
it was friendly suit for the purpose
of settling the legal questions in the
way of the contamination of the deal
has all along been the more popular
one, but the sharp fight the plaintiffs
leading attorney. Mr.. Horn. made
the first day of the trial rather con-
tradicted this. The past two days,
however, the fight has been mainly on
the side of the road, the attorneys
for the plaintiff not showing the same
degree of interest apparently, as
those for the defense.
When Judge Young began his ar
gument yesterday morning, he re-
referred to the comments of some of
the newspapers, and said that the
suit was not collusive, though it
was in a certain sense a friendly
suit.
what do you mean by a friendly
su1t? asked Judge Sanborn promptly,
1ntlmat1ng at the same time that if the
act1on was in the interest of the
Great Northern, it would be unneces-
sary to continue the proceedings
further
Judge Young assured the court that
there was no collision and that the
only sense in which the suit was
friendly one was in this purpose of both
parties to the action to have it tried
strictly on it's merits now that they
We're into it. Neither desired to take
advantage of any technicalities. The
Great Northern was not the instigator.
The action was begun in good faith by
his client and had been and would be
fought out to the end
Judge Young then began his argu-
ment, going into the question Of con-
solidation. He admitted that the pro-
posed scheme was not in reality
consolidation, but he still maintained
that the issuance of one-half the stock
of the Northern Pacific to the Great
Northern meant the practical control
amounted to the same thing. He dwelt
at great length on this phase of the
question, quoting extensively from
opinions to sustain his position. He
/ then took up the question of vested
rights granted to the old Minneapolis
& st. Cloud road by the charter of
date was a mere regulation that did
lob hot hn
legislature had power to change it and
did change it in 1874 and 1881 when the
law forbidding the consolidation Of
parallel lines of road in the state was
passed.
Northern, again addressed the court
at the conclusion of Judge Young's adj
dress. Mr. Grover claimed that the
plan of reorganization was not such as
to come within the inhibitions of the
law. Trains would run and traffic
move as usual over the 5000 miles Of
the Northern Pacific road. 1t would
not do for the Northern Pacific to loan
it's credit for something that has moth
ing to do with it's operation All that
this matter amounted to in the eyes OF
a business man was greater assur-
ance of credit, a greater assurance OF
solvency. If the Northern Pacific paid.
then the Great Northern would not have
to pay, but the stockholders would
have before them the obligation OF the
Great Northern to pay, If necessary.
They would make this security bond
rather than to pay heavy hxed
rental. The Great Northern had the
right to make this traffic arrangement.
Judge Sanborn asked Mr.. Grover II
he thought the Great Northern had
right to buy stock in the Northern IA
cific. The Great Northern proposed
to buy one-half the stock Of the new
organization, in addition to forming
q. traffic ARRANGEMENT, and the consid-
Grafton for this stock was the guar
antee of a certain amount as interest
on the bonds. The court could not
see what other construction could be
placed upon the proposition. 1t seemed
to him that when one company at
tempted to purchase stock IN another
it was acting contrary to law.
Mr.. Grover took the ground In re
Div that this arrangement did not
give the Great Northern ownership or
control within the meaning OF the
prohibitive statute.
Mr.. Horn, for the plaintiff, next ad-
sively from opinions on the quest ton
of vested rights to show that the right
of consolidation granted by the char
ter of the old Minneapolis q st. Cloud
road did not constitute a vested right.
The plan of reorganization must be
taken as whole and examined 70 see If
It was in contrayention of the laws OF
1874 and 1881. The great question was
the practical control which the Great
Northern would obtain by having half
the capital stock where it could. be
the Great Northern over the reorgani-
Statute. This stock was to be issued
as fully paid-up stock, not to be issued
on call or In q particular manner from
time to time The arrangement did
not contemplate an issue of stock to
individuals. The new organization
could issue that $50, 900, 900 directly into
the hands of trustee in the interests
of the Great Northern road. The
Northern Pacific would have power to
- -%0a 80.