The daily silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1903-1907, 1903-08-06
A MERGER VICTORY

While 1t is announced with some
display that Judge Lochren's decieion
in favor Of the Northern Securitie
company in the suit brought by the
state of Minnesota has no bearing
whatever on the federal decision tha'
was so recently rendered in favor OF
the government. a reading of those
sections Of Judge Lochren's opinion
hat are published does not sustain
the announcement. 1t is true that in
one case the Northern Securities com
pany is charged with being organized
in violation of the interstate COM
merce law Of Minnesota. But this Is
immaterial so long as the gist of the
charge against the company is the
same in both cases. In both the
merger is declared to be for the pur-
pose of defeating competition between
the parallel lines CT the Northern Pa
cific and the Great Northern railways.
A decision in one cannot but have
an important bearing in the other
case.
Judge Lochren himself recognizes
that he has in effect set his judgment
up against that of the four Unite
States circuit judges who decided the
first case and who will now pass upon
the Minnesota ease on appeal from his
court, for in concluding his opinion
he says:
My judgment, after most careful
consideration of the facts and the law
applicable thereto. as construed by
the highest court, leads me to the con
clusion that none of the defendant
have violated the Minnesota anti-trus
act, a conclusion apparently co1trary
to that reached by the eminent Judge
who in this court recently decided the
case CT the United States VS.. No. thern
Securities company, and who will
doubtless in another court review tel
cause upon appeal. This necessarily
caused hesitation, and careful exam
ination. But rights of litigants a"d
my own sense of duty alike require
that my own deliberate judgment,
guided by my understanding CT auth
oritativa eXpositions of the law be
given in all cases tried before me.
The burden of Judge Lochren's
reasoning is that while the merger
seems to be for the purpose of pre-
venting competition, and while is is
possible that it may prevent compa-
tition. yet such prevention of com
petition being a serious offense unde
the Minnesota law the court is not
warranted in assuming in advance
that such an offense will be committe
and therefore an injunction cannot be
granted. Il am compelled tn
judge says, Ito reject the doctrine
that any person can be he'd 10 have
committed, or to be purposing and
about to commit a highly pelal of
Tense, merely because it can be shown
that his pecuniary interests will be
thereby advanced, and that he has thl
power either directly or indirectly
through persuasion or coercion of hi
agents TO compass the commission OF
the ~offense." Whatever may be said
of the conclusion such reasoning has
leu Judge Lochren to, the reasoning
itself will not bear a moments ex
animation. The whole theory of the
law in restraint of crime is based
upon the assumption that when a mar
puts him2e.f IN position to commit an
offense and his evident interest lies
in having the offense committed il
is his purpose to commit it. On what
theory are men every day bound oven
to keep the peace? On what other
theory did a New York Judge the 9th
er dsy issue a permanent injunction
restraining strikers from even adj
dressing employees who had taken
their places on tie streets?
There is no question in Judge
Lochren's mind or in anybody e,se's
as to the purpose for which the North
err Securities company was organized
The merger promoters have never
been at any pains to conceal ii. They
have not only admitted that lIei
pecuniary interests lay in a consoi l.
dation Of the competing railways, but