Little Falls weekly transcript. (Little Falls, Morrison Co., Minn.) 1894-19??, 1895-09-20
Attorney General Childs Brings
Suit Against Great North
ID. ern Railway. s'9S 81 d
Wants 1t Restrained From Corr
sufnmating Its Deal With
ID Northern Pacific.
Alleged That the; People OF the
State Will Suffer If 1t Is Ns
\ a Carried Out.

the state, in the Ramsey county district
court, the object gof which is, to rest traii,
4 the Great Mort herll and Northern Pas
cific from entering into their proposed
agreement for cons olidation. The acti 3n
is brought for the same purpose as the
Pearsall case, tried a few weeks ago
before Judge Sanborn in the United
States circuit court, and in which Jndge
Sanborn held that the two CONS
panies sconld enter into the, agree
ment If they chose. That case was
brought by onc OF the stockholders ot
the Great Northern company; the press
ent action is brought by the state 10 pre-.
vent the agceelnr mt OIL account Of the
damages it il allie, Cd the people CT the
state will suffer if the deal is con sum-
mated. ~ '.,',@' ~ ss.@Ef
The co1nplaint in the act on is very
lengthy, covering II pages OF typewrItss
ten 1>lut ter. twill be filed in the dss-
trict court and the whole matter vii
conle up on a motion for all injunction
next Saturday. No temporary injulies
ton has been issued, CT will be issued in
this case. a%, -. - .r '' = Z5sss 35ysRR
- The Complaint Outlined. M
The complaint sets forth the incorpor.
alton of the two roads, the te1Titcyy
covered by main and branch lines, the
insolvency of the Northern Pacific and
the agreement which it is claimed has
been drawn up for combining the two
roads for operation under one head, subs
stantially the the same same as that set
up in the Pearsall case ,ast, Iss
The plaintiff continues by alleging
that he is informed and believesSsthat
the defendant claims the right to make
and carry out the contract and arranga-
ment, including the guarantee, unsief
the authority of the laWssof the state of
Minnesota and IN parti lar under ssthe
authorit offs the sAYe &c spff the leSs;s
atsure, under Isl yShiclh sit claims to bes
ganized n But, the plaintiff AYERS tliat
the laws Of the state do not conf Ter upon
the defendant the power necessary to
make or carry out the arrangement and
that it is prohibited by the laws Of the
state ;& >>,.%- Il. 5t~ ~,%.ss% E,s*% NJ
The complaint further recites the fact
that the roads are sharp competitors for
business and alleges that the agreement
is,sin effect aud for all intents and pur-
poses, consolidation of the interests of
the defendant and the Northern Pacific,
whereby the Great Northern seeks to
obtain the control and operation Of the
other company; that if the companies
are suffered and allowed to enter into
and effect this agreement, they will be
substantially controlled by the Great
Northern management, and that all
competition between them will forever
cease, to the great and permanent DAM
age of the people Of this state. For
these reasons the plaintiff demands
Judgment that the defendant, its
officers, directors. attorneys, agents and
servants be forever enjoined from in
any manner or form entering into, con-
summating or efecting this agreement,
or from consolidating with the North
ern Pacific Railroad company and
furthermore, that a temporary injunc-
ton to the same effect may be issued
pending this litigation; that the said
agreement, arrangement or consolida-
ton, if executed by the said defendant,
may be declared null and void, and Or
dered to be cancelled, and for such other
and further relief as to the court may
seem just. ... - ~