The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-04-09
MERGER ILLEGAL.
Northern Securities Case Decid-
ed by Court Of Appeals.
Government Wins Its Suit
Against Combination.
THE ANTI TRUST LAW.
Judges Hold 1t Was Violated in
the Deal.
Stock May Be Returned to the
Two Companies.
Distinct Victory for President
Roo1avaIf oud Mr. KuOx
THE ANTI TRUST LAW.
Distinct Victory for President
Roosevelt and Mr.. Knox.

st. Paul. Mimi. April s.-The United
States circuit court of appeals today at
noon handed down a decision in the suit
Of the United States against the North
ern Security company enjoining the
company from voting the stock of the
Northern Pacific OF Great Northern
Railroad companies. but allowing the
return of such stock as had been de-
livered to that holding company. The
opinion was unanimous, all four judges
concurring. but the opinion was written
by Judge Thayer- The substance of the
order is in the decree. which is as fol-
lows.
A decree in favor of the United States
win accordingly be entered to the fol-
lowing effect: Adjudging that the stock
of the Northern Pacific and Great
Northern Railway companies now held
by the securities company, was acquir-
ed in virtue of a com bination among the
defendants in restraint of trade and
commerce among the several states,
such as the antitrust act denounces as
illegal; enjoining the Securities company
from acquiring or attempting to ac-
quire further stock of either of said
companies; also enjoining it from voting
such stock at any meeting OF the
stockholders Of either of said com
panies; also enjoining it from voting
such stock at any meeting of the
stockholders of either of said railroad
companies or exercising or attempting
to exercise any control, direction or
supervision of influence over the acts
of said companies or either of them by
virtue Of its holding such stock; enjOin-
ing the Northern Pacific and GreaN
Northern companies respectively. their
ofncers directors and agents from per
mitting such stock to be voted by the
Northern Securities company or any OF
ITS agents or attorneys on it's behalf at
any corporate election for directors or
ofucers of either OF said companies and
likewise enjoining them from paying
any dividends to the Securities com
pany on account OF said stock or per
mitting or suffering the Securities com
pany to exercise any control whatso-
ever over the corporate acts of said
companies or to direct the policy OF
either; and finally permitting the Sc
curtieS company TO return and transfer
this stock to tie stockholders of the
Northern Pacific and Great Northern
companies and all shares of stock of
those companies which it may have re-
ceived from such stockholders in ex-
change for its own stock. or to make
6uch transfer and assignment to such
persons OF persons as are now the hold
ers and owners of its stock originally
issued in exchange for the stock of said
companies.
Circuit Judge Thayer stated tbe. con
clusions of the court He recftes the
petition which was brought under the
anti trust act of 1890, and adds that UNI
der the act of February H. 1903. this
case, being of general public import
ance' has been given precedence over
otnefS and i'm every way expedited IT
Is declared that under the admissions of
the defendants the matters of fact are
that the roads We're parallel and com
peting lines. that they had Jointly Sc
cured control of the Burlington that in
4SOl holding company had been form
ed py large owners or the stock Of the
Northern Pacific and Great Northern
railways by which new company large
stock interests had been acquired at an
agreed price, and the court holds that
the scheme which was thus devised
and consummated led inevitably to the
follows results:
First. 1t placed the control Of the
two roads i'm the hands of a single per
son. to wit. the Securities company. bv
virtue of its ownership of a large ma
jority of the stock of both coInnanies
second. it destroyed every motive for
competition between two roads engaged
in interstate traffic which were natural
competitors for business. by pooling the
earnings Of the two roads for the COM
mon benefit of the stockholders
OF both companies. and. according
.
one is presumed to intend what is
the necessary consequence OF his own
acts when done wlfully and deliber-
ately, we must conclude that those who
conserved and executed the plan afore-
said intended among other thing to ac-
COmplish these objects"
WHAT is "A TRUST
on the point whether the present case
comes within the inhibition of the anti
trust act the court discussed the mean
ing of the word trust in the act. and
adds that congress was careful to de-
clare that a combination in any other
form, If in restraint of interstate trade
or commerce. that is If it directly oc-
casioned or affected. such restraint
should likewise be declared Illegal
Moreover. I'm cases arising under th.
get IL has been held hy the highest
Judicial authority I'm the nation. and it's
opinion has been reiterated TN no un-
certain tone that the act auniies 10 in
gers as we'll as to all other persons.
natural or artificial. that the words "sn
V-tt s.siit - tss.i- -1-.-.,-,F-'.+ 20 rot
mean in unrcasona BILE or partial re-
straint of trade or commerce but any
direct restraint thereof. that an agree
mont between competing railroads
which requires them to act I'm concert
iu fixing the rate for carriage of pas
eengers or freight over their respective
lines from one state 10 another and
which by that means. restricts tempo
rarily the right Of any other Of such
carriers to name such rates for the car
riage Of such freight or passengers over
its road. as it pleases Is a contract i'm
Cirect restraint Of commerce within the
meaning of the act in that IL tends to
prevent competition. that 20 matters
not whether, while acting under euch "A
contract the rate fixed IS reasonable or
unreasonable, the vice of such con-
tract or combination being that IL COM
fers the power 10 establish unfeason-