Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1902-04-18
The Merger Case.

Northern Securities Co., and the Nor
thern Pacific and Great Northern
Railways. lie made the opening adj.
dress, and contendcd that that trib-
unal was the only one that could hear
the case, and that if it refused TO en-
terrain the petition for relief, there is
no court to which the State can APP
ply for redress OF Il great wrong.
The account by telegraph states
that Mr.. S. was frequently interrogat-
ed by the court, which certainly indi-
Gated disposition to consider the
matter in all its details. He summed
up the question presented as to
whether the stock and power of con-
troll Of two gigantic lines Of railway
traversing the States of Washington,
Montana, North Dakota and Mime
sofa may be consolidated SO as to Gre
ate a monopoly in railroad traffic
IhCiSiuy III uchouCC VI IHc laws vi
such or whether corporate entity
can be created and urged for the ex-
press purpose OF overthrowing the con-
stitutional enactments of a number of
sovereign States and thus accomplish
indirectly that which this court has
decided could not be done directly"
The attorneys for the securities
company contend that if the injunc-
ton prayed for be granted, the securi-
ties company would be compelled to
sell its stock in at least one of the
railroad companies; that the securi-
ties company had right to acquire,
own and vote stock, the same as any
individual would have and not be en-.
joined; that the holdings of any per.
son have not been limited by common
or statutory law, and if an individual
could hold without limitations, SO
could a combination OF individuals
They commended that if the State oil
Washington could come to that court
for relief, it could so to the State of
New Jersey for it, and that there was
no precedent for such a proceeding, to
which Justice White remarked that
there was likewise no precedent for
such enormous combinations as had
been complained of in the case.
Mr.. Griggs, one of the securities
company's attorneys, urged that the
merger complained of would not Jake
place in Washington. There was nc
possibility of the violation of a State
law, because Washington had no law
on the subject. 1t was only alleged
that public opinion would be violated
but this court was not here to sustain
the demands of public opinion of one
State against the citizens of another
The States should be left to provide
their own remedies. Let Washington
provide its own laws and try to dc
something herself instead of parading
down here and asking this court to dc
something it has no right to do"
In his rejoinder Mr.. Stratton said
the entire argument on behalf of the
defendant corporations had turned on
the contention that Washington
could not proceed against them be-
cause of her non-residence, whereas he
urged that this very circumstance was
what gave the Supreme Court juris.
diction. Without this interposition
the State was, he repeated, without
remedy.
"What do you think OF State own.
ership? Could not the State take pos.
session of the roads and run them?
asked the Chief Justice.
Mr.. Stratton replied that such q
remedy had not occurred to him
What the State of Washington wanted
was that the court should enjoin a
combination of the two roads in a
third corporation under the guise oil
an individual, and he believed that
this would not be permitted. He
closed with the claim that the com
bination is violation of the contract
obligation of the railroads implied in
their acceptance OF charters from the
State.
ENACTs THE DRAMA ACCORDING TC
THE LINEs.-The Reading, Pa. social