The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-04-21


Palace car company VS. Missouri Pacific
Railway company. lis U. s. 5S7, not te
| possess over such single railway company
| or its commerce.
Sixteenth-The court erred in holding
and deciding that the constitution anc
composition. of railway companies CHAR
laws, but carrying on interstate com
| merce, are themselves matters of inter
| state commerce, and. as such, sub1ec1
| to regulation by congress. And in hold
ing and deciding that under the com
| merce clause of the constitution con-
gress has power to prescribe who may
and who shall not be shareholders In SucE
| companies, and how much stock any one
| stakeholder or combination of stockholders
may own In any such company, and &c
authorize and forbid the consolidation OF
such corporations or any of them.
| And erred in holding and deciding that
the acquisition and holding of stock IN
| such railway companies and all matters
| of their internal constitution and com
| position are not matters over which the
| state Incorporating such company has
| exclusive power of regulation And erred
| in holding that the authorizing or forbid
| ding of the consolidation of any two such
| railway companies is not within the ex-
| elusive power of the state or states by OF
| under whose laws they have been incor-
| porated.
Seventeenth-The court erred in holding
| that consultations of railway companies
| created by or under state laws and com
| petitors in interstate commerce are eff
| fectual restraint upon such commerce
and that such consultations, though ex-
| pressly authorized by state charter, are
| violations of said antitrust act and ille-
! gal
Eighteenth-The court erred in holding
| and deciding that any of the defendants
have ever attempted to interpose the New
| Jersey charter of the Northern Securities
| company as a shield between themselves
| and the law, and that such charter is
| about the only shield that can be so in
| terposed.
| Nineteenth-The court erred in finding
and deciding that the reasoning which hI n
| led to the acquisition of that (the said
| New Jersey charter was that while as
| individuals the promoters could not, by
agreement among themselves, place the
! majority of the stock of the two compel
| ing and parallel railroads in the hands OF
a single person or few persons, glVlpS
| him or them the power to operate the
roads in harmony and stifie competition,
yet that the same persons might create a
purely fictitious person termed corpora
| ton, which could neither think nor act
| except as they directed, and by placing
| the same stock in the name of such artl-
fetal being, accomplish the same pur-
! pose"
| Twentieth-The court erred in holding
| and deciding that the shares of the two
| defendant railway companies held by the
! Northern Securities company have mere
| " been placed in it's name by the former
holders thereof, and that it is not the alb
| solute owner Of the same in its own sole
| right.
Twenty-first-The court erred in hold
ing and deciding that, $50 far as the New
| Jersey charter is concerned, the question
which the court has to determine is
be used to defeat the will of the national
Legislature as expressed in law relating
to interstate trade and commerce over
which congress has absolute control;
| Twenty -Second-The court erred in
| holding and deciding that the existing
| combination gives to few men acting
| in concert and in the name OF. the North
| ern Securities company and under cover OF
| It's charter the power to control all the
means and transportation of the defend
| ant railway companies. and to directly
control said companies and all their com
| merce. .- -..--..
Twenty-th ird-The court erred in de-
filming and deciding that "the object and
| necessary effect of the combination
| give to a single person or to coterie of
| persons full control of all the means or
| transportation owned by two parallel and
| competing lines OF railroad engaged IN
| interstate commerce. as well as the power
| to fix the rate for the transportation Of
| persons and property.
| ing and deciding that the said antitrust
act. is construed as forbidding or restrict
ing the shareholders Of the two defend
ant railway companies from selling their
shares to the Northern Securities COM
pany, or exchanging them for shares of
that company, or forbidding or restrain
ing that company from making such pur-
chases or exchanges and holding the rail-
way shares thus acquired as its own, is a
valid law and not in conflict with the fifth
amendment of the constitution of the
United States.
Twenty fifth-The court erred In hold
| ing that the said antitrust act was in
clude and prohibit virtual consolida-
| tons" of parallel and competing railway
| companies chartered by the several states,
and combinations looking to such 'vir-
! Nal consultations"
Twenty -sixth-The court erred in hold
| ing and deciding that this proceeding can
| be maintained under section one OF said
anti trust act, although 1t Is alleged IN the
! petition itself, and appears by the proofs,
| that whatever the combination or con-
| spiracy complained of was formed to do
had been fully and completely done and
effected before this proceeding was be-
| gun.
Twenty seventh-The court erred In
| diSregarding as immaterial the aVermentS
| of the answers and the proofs in support
thereof showing that the combination in
question was not a combination in re-
straint of commerce; that its purpose
was and its effect has been to very large
| ly build up. increase and protect the in
terstate and foreign commerce of the two
railway companies. And erred in consid-
| ering not all the effects of said COM
| bination upon such commerce, but only
| its possible effect in restraining min
| ute portion of such commerce-an erect
| at the most incidentaEand in unduly
magnifying the extent and Importance of
| such Incidental restraint, and holding the
| same to be the principal if not the only
|
Twenty eighth-The court erred in
| holding that the proofs disclosed any con-
| tract combination or conspiracy in re-
! Straint of interstate or foreign commerce,
| or any other combination than one tC
| build up and enlarge interstate and for
eign commerce without any restraining
! of either.
Twenty -ninth-The court erred in de-
Gliding and decreeing that the defendants
! have heretofore entered into combina-
| ton or conspiracy in rStraint of trade OF
| commerce among the several states, such
as an act of congress. approved July 2
| 1890. denOunceS as illegal"
Thirtieth-The court erred in deciding
and decreeing that all of the stock OF
| either of the defendant railway compa
MES, claimed to be held and owned by
! the defendant Northern Securities com
! pany, was acquired and is now held by the
| Northern Securities company in virtue OF
| the combination or conspiracy mentioned
in the last preceding assignment, ant
erred in decreeing that any of said stock
was acquired or is held in virtue of any
such combination or conspiracy.
thirty first-The court erred in decree
ing that the Northern Securities com.
| pany be enjoined and in enjoining it from
acquiring or attempting to acquire any
further stock of either of the defendant
railway companies, and from voting
any stock at any stockholders meeting
of either railway company, and from ex-
ercising or attempting to exercise any
control, direction. supervision or influence
whatever over the acts of either railway
company by virtue of its holding of stool
therein
Thirty second-The court erred in de-
erecting that each defendant railway
company, and its directors officers, agents
and servants be enjoined, and in enjoin.
ing them, from permitting the share:
thereof held by the Northern Securitie!
company to be voted at any corporate
election of such railway company; ant
from paying to that company any divi
dend on the stock of such railway com.