The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-04-07

DECISION
Continued from First Pa

his own advantage personally as a trus-
tee for others
knowledge of the tendency Of a suit
is not equivalent TO legal notice and
the mere appearance Of one as a witness
in behalf of one who is an actual party
is not an appearance as a party and has
never been so held.
with some reluctance, [ reach the
conclusion that any order or decree af-
fecting the right of the Union Pacific
to acquire hold or vote the stock OF the
Southern Pacific company, owned by Il.
or denying to II the right to vote its shares
for such persons as il shall deem fit and
proper will not conclude that corporation
nor protect the Southern Pacific in ex-
Guiding such shares from participation
in any stockholders meeting Though
there had been no precedent. my concIu-
sion upon principle would have been the
same
The case of Northern Pacific vs. North
srn Securities company has an important
bearing upon this subject. For this rea-
son and without expressing any opinion
as TO the power OF court of equity to
interfere with the privilege of a stock
holder TO vote his shares as he please
and for whom he please. if he be lawful
IL competent to own and hold the shares
at all, or any opinion upon any OF the
other most interesting questions. which
arise properly only in a cause to which
the Union Pacific is q party l must de-
cline 10 grant any injunction restraining
the voting OF the Union Pacific shares
at the approaching election Of directors.
The application 20 retain the cause for
reasonable time in order that Union
Pacific Railroad company may be i'm
pleaded in a forum having jurisdiction
over il to try the question OF it's right TO
hold and vote the shares in question and
to continue the stay order heretofore
granted until such litigation may be
started and brought TO conclusion, must
b, denied
TO continue the stay order heretofore
granted for the purposes desired would
be in effect to dispose OF this litigation.
for if the Union Pacific Railroad COM
pany be denied the right TO vote its shares
at the election to be held under the COM
pany's bylaws it would be TO turn that
company out OF its control and place
the minority stockholders in and thus
accomplish the ends sought by this pro-
| ceed.ng without jurisdiction over the
principal party thereby affected.
- There remains the question as 10
| whether ! shall not grant an injunction
to prevent the defendant from disposing
OF shares OF the Central Pacific. owned
by it, or OF the lease OF the Central Pa
cifc railroad to the Union Pacific Rail-
road company. or anyone acting for =
and in its interest
1t would be difficult 10 find more
fragrant instance Of re7ugnaat trusteeship
than would be exhibited if the persons
in the board should be their votes dis
charge the double function II buying for
the one company and selling for the
other
The design or purpose 10 dispose Of
the Central Pacific stock in whole or IN
part OF OF the Central Pacific lease, has
been most positively repudiated by che
defendant corporation and there has been
produced no evidence whatever in sup
port OF the charge OF such 2 purpose
made by the bill other than the fact that
very large expenditures a.e-being made
upon the Central Pacific line. But ur-
less It could be shown that these ezpendI-
lures were either uICrs wires or IN PURSE
ance OF some fraudulent scheme in DIS
regard % The interests Of the defendant
COMPANY they would afford no ground