The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-01-15
NO DECISION MADE
The Northern Pacific Case Be-
fore the Associate Justices.
a SOLUTION Or THE PROBLEM.
Receiver Burleigh Explains the stun
tion-So Grounds for Belief i nat
the Road VIII lie Divided.

II was generally expected n railroad err
cles snat the foir a. sQcaate justices TOE
hearing the Northern Paeaac. Teeelss fsH'p
case IN Washington city w9uFd alfats a
some conclusion yesterday, OUT thAl -
uactatlou vas Disappointed Il he progress
OF the case ard the sasseRt points brought
Out n IS presentation are announced in
tho following telegram. fTeTa which X VII
be seen that the justices vii q most surely
reach a conclusion tats 1nornils
Washington City. Jan l4s-assoeiate jus
tees Field. Harlan, Brown and bre"er' 81
the supreme court. t0day ~ chambers gave
hearing to the attorneys interested iH haV-
ing the receIvership Of the Northern Pacific
railroad consolidated Attorneys present
were Senator Spo0ner ard Mr. Turner.
renresentlnz the Farmers Trust Company,
Mr. Petit, for the railroad company; Jo-
seph lshoate, 81 the adams committee OF
bondh0lders. and Mr. CaFdoza, for The Liv-
.agst6ne committee for second mortgage
bondhalders. While the arguments vent
into the affairs OF the railroad IN great
detail. showing its financial condition and
the fact Of tho conflicting views OF the
present receivers and the courts BY which
they were appointed. there was practically
but one question before the court.
That was the question Of primary jnris-
presumed there viii be no difficulty in
agreeing upon one receiver for the road.
or one set Of receivers, who would act har-
fnonl0usly as they would be appointed by
the court recognized as having primary
jurisdiction.
The road passes through the seventh.
eighth and ninth ercn.ts. The receivers
for the seventh and eighth circuits are now
actlnr N harmony. Spooner ana
Turner contended for recognition
OF the jurisdiction OF the cir
cult for the Eastern district OF Wis
consln. on the ground that the proceedings
for receivers we're originally Begun ~ that
court in 1883 and that all other courts re-
cognized this jurisdiction Until August
1856 Choate agreed with them or this
point. Cardozas argument was for the
recognition Of the Minnesota court. Pet
tits for shat OF the state Of Washington.
During his argument. ex-senator SpooBer
said II the present condition Of affairs was
allowed 10 continue the road would soon
be split In two. ard II would De necessary
20 operate Il as tao separate lines. 10 the
great injury of all interests. He asserted
that II was a matter Of but few days when
separate organization would be necessary.
Justice Brown suggested 70 Spoouer the
possibility OF the local Federal courts re-
fuslng IN recognize any orders the justices
might promulgate IN answer to these posi-
tons but Spooner replied that he did not
consider this probable. He suggested that
In case the emergency should arise the
Justices might visit the courts for the pur-
pose Of having their orders entered
While the fact did not develop in the
proceedings, II is known that all interests
feel that II they can prevail upon these
four Justices TO unite in a recommendation
II would solve the problem. because they
represent almost one~half Of the supreme
Ia Ia ft. eae
as the representative of the second circuit,
where the Northern Pacific has large
property interests. The hearing was con-
tinued until tomorrow.
When Receiver Andrew +. Burleigh. of
the Northern Pacific was shown the fore
going telegram yesterday he had just been
In consultation with General Traffic Man
ager Hannaford. of St Paul. Assistant
General Freight Agent s. G.. Fulton. OF
Portland: General Manager 6. w. Dickin-
son. and other officers OF the system. who
were I'm and out OF his Office during the
afternoon.
lis there any special significance in the
visit or all these officers just al this time,
Mr.. Burleigh?" asked the reporter.
None whatever a. relating TO receiver
ship matters. If that Is what YOU mean"
said Mr. Burleigh Mr. Uannaford IS
making tour OF the road. and came over
from Tacoma today 10 confer with me.
chiefly with reference TO traffic matters"
''As 20 the telegram from Wash 'ngton
City. Mr.. Burleigh, why were these four
Justices selected FOR hearing the receiver
ship matter?"
Because they are tho four who sit IN
the several circuit courts most concerned
In the matter; the second, seventh. eighth
and ninth
what Of Senator Spooner's predlctlong"
Il can see no grounds Cor believing that
prediction has been made I'm tho East be-
fore. and Il has not been fulfilled do be-
reve, however. that It Is desirable that
some arrangement should be reached nv
which harmony m the affairs or tn. road
may be secured Not exactly harmony
either. for there has been thus Tar no lack
Of harmony, with the exception of "A frvv
minor details, The great Interests or the
road have been looked after with entire ac-
cord. The fact IS that II the public at large
were not aware that the road WAS being tp-
erted by diversity Of receivers such a
state OF things would not be- suspected 4
man might now ride from one end OF the
road 10 the other. or ship his goods tn
whole length Of our Hines and never he
aware that anything out Of the ordinary
existed. with reference 70 the management
e the road I should say. unity. instead or
harmony. ArShe interests are agreed that
unity Of management is desirable "
Are all the Interests ~ - road repre-
scented IN the hearing az Washington city
Yes. as You VIII see by looking over the
list. Practically, the same lawyers are pre-
seniing the case there as appeared IN the
court herr. except that Mr- Fhoste. Who
represents the Adams committee ~ bond
holders. Was NOT IA Seattle. or course have
nc such claim that / could have ANYBODY az
Washington City especially 20 represent
.,yybst ,b.n,. Iustiee Y,r,v.-.. s,,,.-....t...