The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-01-29

Claim. the supreme Justices Think.
Except Brown. Who Would Give
Jurisdiction TO the Minnesota Court.
Washington City. Jan. 2S.-Justices Field.
Harlan, Brewer and Brown, of ghes su-
nreme court today rendered a decision in
the Northern Pacific receivership case,
holding All the courts along the line OF the
road 10 be ancillary 10 Judge jenkins
court at Milwaukee. This decision gives
the Milwaukee court jurisdiction over the
entire system in the matter of the rereiv-
ersnlp II was shown at this hearing that
the creditors bill and the foreclosure pro-
ceedings in 1898 had been filed in the circuit
court for the Eastern district of Wiscon-
sin, over which Judge Jenkins presides.
TX was also shown that this court appoint-
ed receivers for the entire system. who
We're for time recognized. Afterward,
however. the circuit courts for other dis
tFicts appointed receivers for portions of
the road embraced within their respective
jurisdictions, and such confusion and an
tagonism arose that IL was feared the in
terests OF the road would be seriously leo
parded. Exception was taken TO the jur-
isdicuon OF the Milwaukee court on the
ground that the Northern Pacific had no
road except leased line within the limits
OF the Eastern district OF Wisconsin
justices Field. Harlan and Brewer pre-
pared united memorandum Of the concIu-
sions, as follows: The parties in the above
cases, namely, the Farmers Loan and
Trust Company. the Northern Pacific Rail-
way Company. the second mortgage bond
holders represented by Johnston Living
ston, chairman. and the reorganization
committee of the bondholders. represented
by +. A. Adams. have presented TO us petit
tlons setting forth the history of these
causes, and asking that such order he made
in the respective circuits TO which We are
assigned as Will secure the operation as an
entirety OF the property of the railroad
company covered by mortgages in which
the Farmers l.. n and Trust Company is
trustee. and such ether orders ia the prem
ises as shall seem meet Ant said applica-
tion has been heard by us in chambers in
the city OF Washington, under agreement
in writing between said parties that we
should do so.
we are Of the opinion that proceedings
10 foreclose mortga placed by a rail-
read company upon its lines extending
through more than district. 70 the
end that the mortgaged property may be
effectively administered, should be COM
menced in the circuit court Of the district
in which the principal operating offices are
situated. and in which there is some ma
terial part of the railroad embraced by the
mortgage; that such court should be the
court of primary jurisdiction and of pTin-
cipal decree in the administration OF the
property. and that the circuit courts or
other districts should be anciliary thereto.
But. in view of what has transpired in
these foreclosure proceedings, principally
in view of the fact that a portion Of the
line Of road owned by the Northern Pa
cific railroad was and is now in the state
OF Wisconsin, and at the time OF the fling
Of the creditors bill (in which the trustee
and the mortgagee was co-plaintil) the
Northern Pacific railroad was operating
its road through the eastern district Of
Wisconsin, although that part of its line
so operated belonged to another company
and was under lease TO the Northern Pa
ciac railroad for ninety-niBe years and in
view Of the further fact that the railroad
company entered its appearance and as
sented TO the act of the circuit court for
the eastern district OF Wisconsin In taking
Jurisdiction. and as such exercise of 1uris-
diction has been recognized by the
circuit court In every district along the line
of the Northern Pacific railway, and by
all parties, for the space of about two
years, during which time many orders in
the course of administration have been en-
tered. we are of the opinion that the cir
cult court OF the eastern district of Wis
consln has jurisdiction TO proceed to de-
cree of foreclosure. which viii bind the
mortgage company and the mortgaged
property and ought. therefore, 10 be 1e-
cognlZed bv the circuit courts OF every dis
rrict along the line Of the road, as the
court OF primary jurisdiction: and that pro-
ceeisngs in The latter courts. while protect
ing the rights Of the real creditors, should
be ancillary In their character and suoor-
d,nate 70 the proceedings in the court or
urinary Jurisdiction. In expressing these
views We are not 10 he understood as
passng upon the proposition advanced in
argument but not necessary TO be mere con-
sidered. that ~ is competent for circuit
court OF the United States BY consent or
rarties 70 fOreclose the mortgage or 4
railroad. no part Of which IS within the ter
-ftorial jurisdiction OF such c~lrt'
Justice Brown signed a special memor-
an8,,r, OF his views. which Is as follows:
..Tn view of the doubts suggested regarding
the jurisdiction Of the circuit court o. the
United States for the eastern district or
WISCONSIN 70 foreciose the mortgage In
this case. and Of the further fact that the
business Offices Of this company have been
and are still at 81 Paul. 4 think the cir
r,,r court for the district OF Minnesota
should be treated as the court OF primary
jurisdiction. Bot as the whole object OF the
hearing safore the justices assigned 20 the
four circuits In which the property o. Inc
road fs located is 20 secure harmony of ac-
+s0v, I have concluded 10 waIve my personal
,tav- In Difference 20 the opinion Or NY
brethren and To accede 20 the recognition
- the circuit court FOR the eastern district
~ Wisconsin a. the court Of primary 1uris-
9iet.On."
An order was signed by each circuit Jus
.i,a and has been sent 20 each circuit
court The order is as follows: 1T Is
orcered that in respect 10 the proceedings
now being carried on for the foreclosure
of mortgages on the Northern Pacific
RaTrcaH COMPANY. the circuit court FOR
the eastern district of Wisconsin b. re-
Ra~sed as TIE court of primary admins
tration. and that the proceedings IN this
court Viii be aacl.ary In their chara eter
and In aid OF the proceedings IN tas court
of primary administration. But IBIS court
reserves the right at any time. upon appi-
catfen 0f any person or persons interested.
or upon its own motion. - make such
orders and DEGREES a. II shall seem just
for the protection OF the creditors OF the
railroad company reslding within its Juris-
d.ctlon."