The Saint Paul globe., 1897-05-21
llIAS THE CREDITS COMPANY RIGHT
TO INTERVENE IN U. p.
MATvTERSf
4 ARGUMENTS BEFORE SAMBORN.
SIOUX CITY CONCERN WILL STOP
/ PROPOSED SALE IF 1T POS
SIBLY CAN.
rsr1NNEsoTA HAS SOME INTEREST.
D. Cut Of Some of the Duluth
Trade.

The petition of the Credits Commuta-
I tion company for leave to intervene In
4 the case Of the United States of Amer
lea, complainant, VS.. Union Pacific
Railway Company ct al, defendants;
/, f. Gordon Dexter and Oliver Ames
Secord trustees complainant, VS.. Union
Pacific Railway Company ct al, de-
fendants; Oliver Ames Secord and Sam
uel Carr, executors, compliments, vs.
| Union Pacific Railway Company ct al,
/ defendants, was partially argued be-
fore Judge w. H. Sanborn, United
\ States circuit appellate judge, yester-
day.
There was formidable array of coun-
sci. John c. Coombs and Henry j. Tay-
dor appeared as solicitors for the petit
ltioners; Gov. George F. Hoadley, of
Ohio, and Gen. John w. Corwin, Of
Omaha. for the United States; Winslow
S. Pierce and Judge John F. Dillon for
the Union Pacific reorganization COM
mittee, and the Union Pacific Railway
Company.
Judge Coombs argued for the peti-
tioners. He said that the comprehen-
the said great public enterprises by the
petitioners was to promote and accom-
modate an interchange of traffic and
K transportation between the country
\ west of the Missouri river at Sioux
City and the. head Of lake navigation at
\ Duluth, and there the usefulness and
value of all said railroad terminal
II bridge properties depended upon such
connection as may be made between
/ the same and the main line of the
Union Pacific railroad and the place Of
l such connection.
4 He said that the communication COM
u psny was organized and acquired it's
L properties and completed it's bridge for
the purpose, among others, Of securing
ia connection with the Union Pacific
railroad by building, Or causing to be
H built, a railroad from Sioux City in a
II generally southwesterly direction to
Junction with the Union Pacific rail-
kroad.
y He said that the petitioner was the
y owner of one Of the first mortgage
bonds Of the Union Pacific company,
| and brought this action to protect it's
several interests for itself and all 9TH
ers in like situation.
The duties, obligations and servf-
| tudes due from the Union Pacific, Mr..
CoombS said, were contained in the
| 18th section of the act of July 1, 1862,
as follows: BE it further enacted:
That any other railroad company now
/ incorporated, or hereafter to be incor.
porated, shall have the right to con-
meet their road with the road and
branches provided for by this act, at
such places, and upon such just and
. fol fa,s, f1a 81 %Io
+ United States may prescribe"
He said that under this provision,
the president Of the United States must
fix the place Of connection with the
Union Pacific railroad before any COM
pany desiring the same can be sure
that its incorporated location will con-
form Herewith.
Mr.. Coombs gave a full history Of
the building of the Union Pacific. He
let the light in on some of the pro-
II ceedfngs, and scathingly- denounced the
| Union Pacific officials for misapplying
4 the governments funds and shutting
out the middle Northwest.
He asked for his rights, he said, af-
ter a generation of deprivation. The
II wrongs inflicted for the benefit Of this
n single system were untold. He claimed
I that the Union Pacific and the North
western systems had entire control OF
J the middle Northwest, and had per-
| Judge Sanborn asked the attorneys
/ for the respondents if they would be
kwilling to have inserted in the decree
Ia provision that the petitioner be al
klcwed to make connection with the
4 Union Pacific.
Mr. Pierce replied that the law COW
! cred this point. They would agree to
! a mechanical connection.
d Gov. Hoadley said he would con-
sent to nothing, so far as Mr.. Coombs
WAS concerned, because if he did so,
ihe would be obliged to make further
Ec4nceSSionS.
A lMr. Coombs said that his road had
lnlot only the right to connect with the
U Union Pacific, now in default, but also
With the Central Pacific, not in de-
lault
/ There was no scope in the original
Union Pacific act for foreclosure Oh
behalf of the United States. in respect
10 property which had already re-
tyerted to it. The attorney general was
sordered to see that foreclosure was
judicially enforced His interpreta-
tion of foreclosure was that it meant
!. foreclosure and not foreclosure sale.
The supreme object of the construc-
4 Hion of the road was to promote the
public interest and welfare, and to the
use and benefit Of which the govern
J. ment was at all times entitled.
II The arguments will be resumed this
i morning.
II Minnesota has an interest in the out
kcome of the case to some extent. 1t is
slclaimed by the Credits Communication
.lcompany that, If the reorganization is
fcarried into effect under the plan now
n completed, that the Vanderbilt inter-
4 tests will secure monopoly of all the
1 mammoth grain and corn interests of
the middle Northwest, and that in
stead of having the benefit of lake and
/ rail competition, that Iowa, Nebraska
] i,Wyoming. Kansas and Missouri must
pay tribune to the Eastern lines and