The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-08-02
JUDGE LocHREN's DECISION.

dNg
sought to be against the Northern Securities COM
pany by the officials of the state of Minnesota 1t de-
clares that the holding company formed under that name
is not railroad company, that it has not consolidated
parallel and competing lines, that 1t has not vloiated inc
antitrust of the state and that it does not therefore
come in any particular within the prohibition OF Our stat
utes The document is comprehensive Ill its survey ana
its statement of the issues involved and the application
to them of law And it necessarily rehearses also
the inception and progress OF one OF the great move
nents of our time may be read with ive1er interest
keener popular conception of its conclusions than
apt be inspired by decisions of the courts as rule
Judge Lochren lays emphasis the facts that led
to the formation of the Northern Securities company
since only in the light of its purpose be under
stood He rehearses the need of larger market Tor
Pacific coast products at the East and larger west
traffic cheaper transportation, the purchase OF
the Burlington make this idea practicable and the at
tempt of the Hartman interest to capture the Northern
Pacific after its wish to intervene had been denied These
are the actsfacts unnoted then and since by the
federal led to the formation of hold
ing company, since they demonstrated its necessity.
The questions for the court to decide were whether
this company, consttuted,was illegal under the stat
ute of this state forbddng the consolidation of compel
ing and parallel lines of railroad and whether 1t came
within the prohibition of the state law against agree
nents restraint of trade. The latter is first considered
and examined exhaustivey in the light of decisions rem
dered by the supreme of the United States IN suits
brought under the Sherman act whose language the act
this copies In all of these it is found that the
act complained of must be directly and Immediately re-
srictive of commerce. The state law be similarly
construed.
The court now arrives at the central fact of its de-
cson the fact really decisive of all contentious raised
which is the conclusion that the Northern Securities is
not railroad company 1t has no franchise, exercises
power manage has sought to interfere with
control the several properties whose stock 1t pur-
chased at has, therefore,, the court done no act
and made no contract in restraint Of trade.
Here the decision necessarily approaches the held re-
Gently covered by the circuit court OF appeals Although
the state of Minnesota cannot enforce federal statute
or even inquire violation, the identity OF the local
and the federal forces comparison OF the con-
illusions drawn from them Judge Lochren is certainly
supported by the weight of the opinions heretofore rem
dered by the supreme when he says that no con-
tract agreement act by the defendant has ever been
pointed out which is directly in restraint OF trade or
even threatens it, and that the doctrine must be rejected
as monstrous which holds that either or cor
potation has committed intends to commit an oftense
merely because might have the power to compass Sucn
an act indirectly if so disposed.
Thus following the older and better line of decision
Judge Lochren finds i'm the formation and acts of the
Northern Securities violation of the antitrust act of
Minnesota Neither does it contravene the statute against
consolidating parallel and competing lines OF railroad
because that taken place. Again is rected that
the Northern Securities is not railroad company and
that none of the parties whom this act applies have
done the thing declared illegal The court states, IN
few brief lucid the true and scientific con-
transportation business to the state and OF the safeguard
ing of the public That competition is in wise threat
ened 1t exists since the formation of the Northern Sc
curites existed before< The railroad companies re-
main separate corporations incapable of consolidating
and the Northern Securities remains holding company
whose office simply protect these great properties
against such raids that which defeated only
by the most instant and vigorous action.
This is the larger camer judicial view the view that
falls in with precedens and the uerances of courts.
AS far the action of the state concerned it ends
everything subject only to review by higher tribunals
But it was worth while have this suit instituted that
there might come from the bench clear and convnc
ing rehearsal of this important cause in its entirety;
not with choppng of logic straning of conclusions,
but with that frank adherence to fact and that
of Justice which have made courts trusted and
spected by all Our people.
The influence of this decision, which will before
the higher along with that rendered by the circuit
of appeals, cannot fail to be great While it deals
with the effect of state statutes its reasoning parallel
to that by which the federal law is be interpreted.
And the holds only that there has been vio
laton of law but that the purchase of the stocks of
the two companies by single individual would not
work consolidation unless such consolidation were
actually accomplished matter of fact. The decision
destroys the confusion heretofore raised between the
power to violate law and the actual violation 1t
the distinction between what affects commerce
directly and what touches it only remotely and incl
denally. And it afrms the right of men to buy and
hold property using it within the law which has seemed
be singular peril 1T the needed corrective OF the
and strained Interpretation OF law voiced by the cir
cult of appeals
For all of these reasons the findings of Judge Loeb
clear the air. They will pass to higher trbu-
nal for affirmation denial May there not and should
there pass with them the acrmony the prostitution
Of public ends private and political purposes, with