The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1902-02-25
COURT DENIES APPLICATION TO
FILE BILL.
is WITHOUT JURISDICTION
Opinion In Northern Securities Com
pany Case Read BY Justice
Shiras.

Washington, Feb 24.-The supreme
court today delivered it's opinion in
the case of Minnesota VS.. the North.
ern Securities company on the appli
cation of the state to file bill of com
plant in that case. The opinion was
read by Justice Shrias and the motion
for leave to file the bill was decided
on the ground that this court is with
out jurisdiction. This is the case in
which the state Of Minnesota made an
effort to secure the intervention of the
supreme court to prevent the merging
OF the Northern Pacific and the Great
Northern Railroad companies by in
| junction. Justice Shras summed up
/ the judgment Of the court as follows:
"As the Great Northern and the
j Northern Pacific Railway companies
are indispensable parties, without
whose presence the court acting as a
court of equity. cannot proceed and as
our constitutional jurisdiction would
no1 extend to the case if those COM
panies were made parties defendant
the motion for leave to file the pro-
posed bill must be, and is. denied"
| The decision is a voluminous one.
but the greater part of it is a review of
the history Of the case Summarizing
the case, Justice Shiras said
"The case presented by the charges
and prayers of the bill is that the
state of Minnesota is apprehensive
that the majority of the stockholders
respectively of the Great Northern and
! Of the Northern Pacific Railway COM
panies have combined and have made
an arrangement through the organiza-
tiOn of corporation of the state CT
New Jersey whereby such consolida-
ton. CT what is alleged to amount to
the same thing. a joint control and
management of the Great Northern
and Northern Pacific Railway COM
panies shall be effected, as will oper-
ate to defeat and overrule the policy
of the state in prohibiting the con-
solidation Of parallel and competing
lines of railway and therefore appeals
to court of equity to prevent by in
junction the operation and effect of
such combination and arrangement"
The opinion then continued: THE
directors of the Great Northern and
Northern Pacific companies are ap-
pointed to represent and protect not
merely the private and pecuniary in
terests of the stockholders. but the
rights Of the public at large which is
deeply concerned in the proper and
advantageous management Of these
public highways. It is not sufficient
tc say that the attorney general or
the governor or even the legislature
can be conclusively deemed to repre-
sent the public interests in such a
controversy as that presented by the
bill. even as a state when she yOlun-
tarily becomes complainant in a
court Of equity. cannot claim to repre-
sent both sides Of the controversies
Not only have the stockholders. be
they few or many, right to be heard |
through the officers and directors |
whom they have legally selected to
represent them, but the general inter
ests of the public, which might be
deeply affected by a decree of a court, |
Id t~ 1>~ tl,ot who,
state is complainant and in case
like the present can only be effected
by the presence of the railroad com
panies as parties defendant.
Upon investigation it might turn
cut that the allegations of the bill
are we'll founded and that the state
is entitled to relief or it might turn
out that there is no intention or de-
sign on the part of the railroad COM
panies to form any combination in
disregard of the policy of the state,
but what is proposed is consistent
with that policy and advantageous to
the communities affected. But in
making such investigation a court OF
equity must insist that both sides to |
the controversy shall be adequately |
represented and fully heard.
'sWhen it appears to court OF |
equity that case, otherwise present
ing ground for it's action. cannot be |
dealt with because of the absence OF
essential parties. it is usual for the
court, while sustaining the objection
to grant leave to complainant to