The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-08-30
Attorney General Crow Institutes
Proceedings to Compel Local
Bridge Corporations to -Ari
~ Independently.
JURY TO TRY THE ISSUES.
Claims Law Forbidding Merger of
Parallel Lines Is Violated and
Rates Made to Detriment
of st. Louis.
HFPURLIl SPECIAL,

REPUBLIC SPECIAL
jefferson City, Mo, Aug. 2e.-Attorney
General Crow to-day filed a quo warranto
proceeding in the Supreme Court in banc to
Dust the Terminal Railroad Association of
Isl Louis from doing business in Missouri
for violation OF the Missouri statutes in
Maintaining competing parallel lines of rail-
way in st. Louis.
In accordance with the authority granted
+. him by the State Constitution. Mr.. Crow has
demanded that the issues be tried before
jury. thereby making it incumbent upon the
supreme Court to appoint a Circuit Judge
of the State of Missouri to conduct the
hearing.
The move on the part of the Attorney
General. is strike at the so-called Bridge
Arbitrary of St Louis. the proceeding being
directed at the root OF the organization
which is now in control of the EadS bridge
and the Merchants bridge of st. Louis.
TREATS OF DIFFERENT CHARTERS.
In presenting his petition TO the court, Mr..
Crow treats very volumnously of the diff
ferent charters issued to companies in ST.
Louis as far back as 1873 and traces each
new corporation formed. or lease OF con-
solicitation made. TO the present time with
the intention to show to the court that
o the ON e T ha fbs
Ihndges across the Mississippi River at St
be- CHARGED an s and thus does awas With any
competition between the two bridge COM
panies as INDEPENDENT corporations
He also claims that the Terminal Railroad
: association, which is now capitalized at
sJ.0)00D, has come into possession OF the
controlling stock in all Of the transportation
companies which are now merged into the
Terminal Association combine.
CONTRACTS ARE ILLEGAL.
The Informant charges that by reason Of
the contract executed on the nth of August,
1893, between the respondent and the st.
NO fo GDfnnany.
having been made by and between com.
petitfve roads, is illegal and void, and that
The lease is made in conflict with and viola
ton OF section 1852 Of the Revised Statutes
of 1899 OF Missouri. and is in conflict with
and violation Of the public welfare and pub
lie policy Sf the state . Of tSs
company is also violating the State law IN
securing possession Of the other competing
larallel railways which went into the me lei.
= E3urtv to forfeit the charter OF the company
and GUST It from its corporate rights and
from doing business In the State.
The informant also prays that the com
psny be ousted for absorbing the st. Louis
Transfer Company for the same reasons az
In rpeaking about the custer suit filed
with the court, Attorney General Crow to-
night said:
ATTACKS BRIDGE
ARBITRARY.
'Hrhe object, OF course. of this suit is to
break up the bridge arbitrary, which has
st. Louis by the throat II It can be shown
that the Terminal Railroad Association has
violated the laws OF Missouri In consolidat-
ing by lease or purchase competing parallel
lines in the State. then the company Is IL
able to have its corporate right forfeited to
the State.
.s,This II a State proceeding striking at the
organization of the Terminal Company and
not an Injunction to prevent the consolida-
ton of The two bridge companies. me Ell
feet wifi he the same as 1t VIII dissolve
the combination which now possesses the
>skwo bridge properties and controls the rates
Eyto suit itself.
II understand that there is Federal pro-
ceeding pending directed against the Same
defendant corporation to break up the
bridge arbitrary, 1t is my belief that that
proceeding seeks to prevent the two bridges
being controlled by the same interests to
the detriment of the public and interstate
commerce.
HAS VIOLATED LAWS.
II believe that the way to get at the bot
tom of the whole matter and relieve the
citizens OF ST. Louis is to strike at the cor
pprate existence of the s5ooooooo corpora
ton. 1t has plainly violated the State law
rs respects. the consolidation of parallel
lines in order to maintain an exorbitant
rate. and if this can be shown In court q
dissolution of the Terminal Association in
to Its several component parts Will be ef-
fected and the companies forced to do bust
ness independently"
The application for n writ of custer filed
i'm the Supreme Court to-day Is made re-
furnable on the 18th Of October. when court
\ in banc meets for its October call. The de-
- PENDANT company on that date will be forced
10 fight return to the proceeding institut-
ed to-day.
The return may be In the nature of a de-
1murrer which admits the facts as alleged
but holds that the facts ere not sufficient
10 constitute cause OF action.