The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1903-04-17
HISTORY OF CASE.
Federal Antitrust Law Mas the Cow
#= ernment's Chief Reliance.

The Northern Securities company
case is everywhere regarded as a ri
cial II in the governments campaign
against the trusts. On this decision the
beef merger II many other schemes
have waited. A Southern Securities
company would have been organized
very soon to talk over the southern
railroads controlled by Morgan; and
visions Of Il United States Securities
company, to one day control all the rail-
roads, have been regarded as not I'M
duly fanciful. i
The Northern Securities was organ
lied by Hill and Morgan November 80,
1901; capital, $400,0 00. 000, laws Of New
Jersey. 1t offered to give $3.50 in it's
own stock for every 500 share of Great
Northern, and $115 of it's own shares
for each share of Northern Pacific. The
Northern Pacific soon came under con-
troll Of the securities company; the
Great Northern is understood now to
be also under the control.
BOUGHT THE BURLINGTON.
About the same time the Northern
Pacific and Great Northern cam into
control Of the Burlington system
through purchase of its shares. They
exchanged their joint 4 per cent. bonds
at $500 Of bonds for each 500 share Of
Burlington stock. Thus the Northern
Securities controlled the Northern Pa
citic. and Great Northern; II these
two in turn controlled the Burlington.
The state of. Minnesota protested
against the merger OH the ground that
it was a consolidation of parallel and
competing roads, contrary to the states
law; also alleging it violated the Sher-
man antitrust act, and was contrary
to public policy.
Attorney General Griggs ordered &C
ton brought against the Northern Sc
atI ri fSr,. 49,, - ~, ~ ~, -.
state of Minnesota. This action was
brought in h circuit court of the
Eighth circuit. This is one OF the
ablest judicial bodies in the world, cas-
lily comparable to the federal supreme
court. Judges Sanborn, Thayer and
Caldwell composed the court when the
case started; afterward Judge Vande-
anter was added, and this is the first
case in which he has sat. He was es-
p~ecially asked by the other Judges to
come to ST. Louis and sit because Of
the great Importance of the case.
FAMOUS WITNESSES.
The hearings in the case have occu-
pied an immense amount Of time, being
chiefly before a commissioner OF the
court, whose findings We're to be con-
sidered and the evidence reviewed by
the court itself. During the taking Of
testimony many Of the worlds great
est financiers We're examined and in
variably manifested strange ignorance
about their w business, and still more
startling lapses Of memory about gi-
gantic and essential features of their
own affairs. Morgan, Hill, Hartman
and others We're examined. Attorney
General Griggs went out of office and
was succeeded by General Knox. Mr..
Griggs joining counsel for the COM
pany.
Under federal court practice, his
case will now go to the United States
supreme court. h bill passed during
the recent congressional session per-
hitting advancement of imnortant
causes will get the case before the s1e
preme court in October. if lawyers on
both sides hasten; and after that a de-
cision will be rendered in fifteen 70
thirty days. The ability and renown
Of the trial court will BIZ accepted as an
evidence that the higher court will sus-
tain the decision.
PLANS TO DODGEaIT.
: Evidently anticipating this decision.
the Burlington interests a year ago
tried to get preliminary legislation
passed in Iowa, it was alleged, in Or
der that they might transplant tha
Northern Securities in a new form ia
Iowa; II failing because of the gov
errors veto of the Molsberry bill. an
other effort was made about a month
ago, in Nebraska, to insert exactly the
same provision into Nebraska laws that
Cumnlins had rejected when adopted
into iowa law. This Nebraska effort
also failed because the genesis OF tbe
measure became known before it could
be rushed through.
Now come announcement that Nor
gan and Hill will turn over the con-
troll Of the three systems to three tr,,s-
tees. thus getting the effect Of a merger
without the violation of law. LAWYERS
say, however, that plan would almost
certainly fail; the courts interest them
selves in essentials rather than in forms
and details.