The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1902-01-28
THE ANTl-MERGER ARGUMENT
Attorney General of Minnesota De-
mands That State Laws he I'm
held by United states Courts

Washington, Jan. 27.-In the United
States Supreme Court to-day Attorney
General Douglass, of Minnesota. re-
newed his motion for leave to file a bill
OF complaint on behalf of the state
against the Northern Securities Com
pany in the matter of the merger of the
Northern Pacific Railroad with other
railroads, saying that he had given no.
tice to the defendants as required by
the court.
W. ID. Guthrie, for the Northern Sc
curlties Company, filed a brief with the
court outlining the company's position.
Attorney General Douglass made an
argument in support of the motion for
leave to file his bill of complaint
He closed his argument as follows:
III what is attempted to be done here
can be successfully accomplished the
states of this union are powerless to
enforce such statutes. The national
government, under its present consti-
tutional limitations, can enact no leg
islation which will protect state COM
merce and state traffic against such
a monopolistic consolidation as is re-
ferred to in this bill. The only prac-
teal way the state can protect itself
is by the adoption of legislation of the
character, sought to be enforced in
TINS action, and the only tribunal in
winch that can be enforced under the
circumstances disclosed in this bill is
the one to which we now appeal. 1t
seems to us that there is a controversy
between the state of Minnesota and
the defendant corporations citizen Of
the state of New Jersey-which, under
the constitutional provision referred
to, entities the state of Minnesota TO
the privilege of the jurisdiction of this
court: in fact, this is the only judi
cial tribunal in which the state of
Minnesota can well assert it's claim
and present its controversy against the
defendant
The OppOsition's Contention.
Mr.. Guthrie contended that the bill
of complaint proposed to be filed on
behalf of the state of Minnesota does
not present a controversy of a civil and
judicial nature between a state and
citizen of another state justiciable in
this court, and that no state can call
upon this court to enforce its penal
or police laws in other states. The sole
ground OF complaint, he maintained,
is the alleged violation in New Jersey
of certain enactments contained in the
statutes of Minnesota. Hence he con-
tended that the injunction prayed for
would be nothing more or less than an
order compelling the securities COM
pany to obey in New Jersey the laws
of Minnesota.
Former Attorney General Griggs fol-
lowed, also speaking for the Securities
Company. He said the fundamental
error of the state of Minnesota in this
proceeding is in making a claim 10
the assistance of this court in the ex-
ercise of its sovereignty. AS for the
statutes which the state seeks to have
enforced they were only prohibitive
of acts conceived to be harmful, and
at best the command of the state could
not be considered effective outside the
state. The public police authority of
one state could not be extended to
another state. NJ. d. Mann, contend
ing for the state of Minnesota, argued
that the state could enforce it's law
in other state.
When Mr.. Mann concluded, the
court took the application under ad-
visement.