The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-01-10
District Attorney MacFarIane Files
Complaint I'm the United States
Court of Southern New York.
HE ASKS FOR AN INJUNCTION
SAYS THE PRESIDENTS AGREEMENT
VIOLATES THE ANTITRUST LAW.
Board Of Control Calls n Meeting to
Consider the Matter-One Receiver
for the Northern Pacific.

York against the thrty-tw0 railroad COM
panies forming the Joint Traffic Association.
Mr. McFarlane also gave notice that on
Jan. II he would move for an injunction
restraining the association from operating
under its agreement. In the bill OF COM
plant, it is charged that the agreement
between the companies is intended to COM
bine or pool all competition in traffic with
in its scope and that the agreement covers
all through traffic Of the great trunk lines
which comprises very large part of the
Interstate railroad traffic Of the United
States. This agreement, it is further al
legged, is unlawful in that IL establishes
not only a traffic pool, but likewise pool
of earnings, in violation Of Section OF
the interstate-commerce act and that it is
a contract or combination in restraint of
interstate trade and commerce. and I'M
lawful under the antitrust act Of July,
1890, known as the Sherman antitrust act.
The bill of complaint asks, as relief, to
have the contract between the railroads
declared null and void and the parties to
it perpetually enjoined from acting under
the agreement. The complaint also asks Tor
a temporary injunction.
After citing the names of the thirty-two
railroads and the States in which they are
Incorporated, the complaint reads:
THAT the Joint Traffic Association is a
voluntary association organized under GER
tain articles of organization entered into
and executed by the several railroad and
railway companies hereinbefOre named;
that all the defendants are common car
riers, incorporated as aforesaid, either by
States of the United States or under the
public statutes of such States, and as sucn
common carriers, at all the days and times
hereinafter mentioned and prior thereto,
were and still are engaged in the transpor-
tation of freight and passengers, either
separately or in connection with escn otn 1ss;
in trade and commerce continuously carried
on among the several States of the United
States, and among and between the sew
eral States OF the united states , hnG the
and Territories and foreign countries and
from places in the United States through
foreign countries to other places in the
The bill alleges that prior to Nov. 10. 1885,
the defendants, and more especially the
the Erie, the Grand Trunk, the Delaware,
Lackawanna & Western, the PENNSYLVANIA,
the New York Central, the Lake Shore, the
Michigan Central and the Wabash. with
their tributary lines, were in active competl-
ton, but that on the date mentioned the
defendants, ''unlawfully intending to re-
strain trade and fully intending to restrain
trade and commerce among the several
States, and attempting to monopolize such
trade and commerce, and intending to re-
strain and prevent competition among the
said railroads in respect to all the inter-
state trade and commerce hereinafter more
particularly described, and continuing and
intending unlawfuly and unjustly to deprive
the public of the facilities and advantages
which the said public had heretofore OBJ
tanned from Independent competition of
such roads or any of them, and intending
TO establish and maintain rates OF freight
and passenger transportation fixed arbi-
trarily and uninf1uenced by competition, en-
tered into a certain unlawful contract,
agreement, combination and conspiracy. to
restrain S trade and commerce 9n among E,t the
document entitled, articles of organization
of the Joint Traffic Association"
The bill proceeds with statement Of
terms of the Joint traffic agreement, which
is characterized as an unlawful contract,
agreement, combination and conspiracy" to
do away with competition in the freight and
passenger traffic of the defendant corpora
lions, and alleges that the railroad COM
panies are now preparing TO put into opera
ton that agreement to the great detriment
and disadvantage of the public and in viola
tion of the laws in this behalf, in considera-
tion of which the court Is asked to adjudge
and decree that the said agreement is
lawful, null and void. and that the defend
ants, and each and every one of them, and
their officers, agents and servants, and each
and every one of them, be enjoined, per-
petually, from continuing combination
association established by the said agree
ment, and from acting or in any way oper-
ating their roads hereunder, either in re-
spect to the provisions of said agreement,
or In respect to division among the several
companies parties to said agreement. The
court is also asked TO grant writs of SUBJ
poena on defendants and an injunction re-
straining them from acting under. enforc-
ticles OF organization. and from operating
their said railroads Hereunder, and from
further proceeding in any manner to carry
said agreement into effect and operation"
At the conclusion OF yesterdays session
of the managers of the Joint Traffic Asso-
sa9n fe was ia given OUT bin of co
plant filed by United States District Attor-
ney MacFarlane in the United States Court
for the southern district of New York, hav-
Ing been served on the parties to the arti-
Giles of the organization of the Joint Traffic
Association. a meeting of the board OF con-
troll has been convened 10 consider this and
other subjects coming before it, being the
first meeting since the association was or
gained"
board Of control will consider this matter
on Tuesday next 1t was further stated
at yesterdays session the time was con-
sumed in hearing reports OF the committees
on import rates, carriages and passenger
commits sons, all of which committees We're
continued.
One Receiver for the Northern Pacific.
Judge Gilbert, OF Portland, Ore, in the
United States District Court, yesterday, APP
pointed Andrew r Burleigh. of Seattle. sole
receiver for the Northern Pacific railway.
Court convened shortly after 1890 o'clock
and attorney James w. Ashton. representing
Mr.. Burleigh, asked that a more harmonious
arrangement be made in the matter of the
Northern Pacific receivership by appointing
a sole receiver. He was entirely willing to
leave the matter to the discretion of the
court. Attorney w. +. Sanders. represent
ing the company, was asked If he had any
thing to say. He replied in the negative.
w. +. Cullen addressed the court in behalf
OF his clients, telling how judicially they
had conducted the road, and requested that
compensation be fixed for past duties. As
regards new receivers he left the matter
entirely In the hands of the court. Attor-
ney Bayburg, representing the Farmers
posed TO let the court act without any sug-
gestion from him. Judge Gilbert then
briefly stated the matter before the court,
and said a change was necessary, not for
any personal reason concerning present re-
ceivers but for more harmonious manage
had been cast on the action of the present
receivers. and praised them highly. He did
not coincide with Judge Knowles concern
ing the management OF the road, and there
fore, would set aside the order appointing
Messrs. Bonner and Mills and In their
his bond at 100000.
Pennsylvania By-Layvs to BE Changed.
meeting OF the board of directors OF
the Pennsylvania Company will be held at
Philadelphia on Tuesday TO take such action
as is necessary for changing the bylaws.
IL was the intention to have this change
made before his time. but 1t was found i'm
possible TO do so. The reason for the pros
pective action on the bylaws Is that a
change il desired in the organization of the
lines NJ tina DanpovIvorfa Rofrrna1 Co~.no-..