The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-04-21
Thirty-four Points of Error AL
legged by Counsel
For Northern Securities Com.
pany in Their Appeal.
EXCEPTIONS NOTED.
In Every Paragraph Of the
Judges Decision.
They Declared That the Case
Should Have Been Dismissed.

ST. Paul, April 2i-Ihirty-fOuF points
of error are alleged by the counsel for
the Northern Securities company and
other defendants in their appeal from
the decision of the circuit court. Ex
ceptions are noted to every paragraph
in the decree and the court is declared
to be in error in rendering any decree
save one for a dismissal of the petition
and proceedings. Among the points are
the following:
'sThe court erred in finding and decid-
ing that the Northern Securities scheme
as aforesaid erroneously found by it to
have been devised and consummateds
placed the control of the railways of
said Northern Pacific and Great North
ern roads in the hands of the Northern
Securities company and destroyed every
motive for competition between said two
railways by pooling their earnings for
the common benefit Of the stockholders
of both railway companies and erred in
finding and deciding that such schems
or any pooling of earnings was ever con-
templated or to have been made
The court erred in holding and de-
Gliding that all contracts and combina-
tions which merely tend to restrain in
terstate commerce whether by suppress
sion of competition or otherwise, are III
themselves and although such tendency
does not result IN any such restraint
violations of the act of congress OF July
2, 1890. known as the antitrust act.
The court erred in holding and de-
Gliding all contracts and combinations
which merely confer the power 10 re-
strain interstate commerce whether by
suppression of competition or otherwise,
are eyasive contracts or combination III
! restraint of such commerce and declared
illegal by the antitrust act, though
sucn power is not and not intended to
/ be exercised
THE court erred in holding and de-
Gliding that every combination whereby
4 the power is acquired to suppress COM
petition between two parallel and COM
/ petug lines OF railroad operating under
state charters and engaged in Inter-
state commerce is a combination in NiO-
lation Of the said antitrust act, whether
such power IS exercised or intended to
/ be exercised, 0r not.
The court erred in holding and de-
! Gliding that it would have been a viola
tion of said antitrust act had the indi-
vidual defendants in pursuance of a
/ previous agreement so to do, sold their
shares of stock in the defendant railway
companies to a natural person. and had
! induced their fellow shareholders to do
the same. with the resulting acquisition.
by such individual of a majority of the
stock of each railway company.
THE court erred ia holding and de-
Gliding that the interstate commerce or
each defendant railway is controlled by
its shareholders and not by its board Of
directors.
Gliding that the Northern Securities
/ company controls the commerce of both
| of the defendant railway companies,
though by the charter of each COM
pany the management of its business is
vested in its board of directors and the
companies must have separate and dis
tinct boards of directors.
The court erred in holding the owns
ership of a majority Of the shares of
each Of two competing railway COM
-
shares a control over each of such COM
panies and its commerce
The court erred in holding and de-
Gliding the constitution and composition
of railway companies chartered by
states or organized under state laws,
but carrying on interstate commerce
are themselves matters of interstate
commerce, and as such. subject to reg
ulation by congress and in holding and
deciding that under the commerce
clause of the constitution, congress has
power to prescribe who may and y
shall not be shareholders in such COM
panies, and how much stock any ona
stockholdeT or combination of stock
holders may own in any such capacity
and to authorize and forbid the consoi-
idation of such corporations or any OF
them. And erred in holding and decid-
ing that the acquisition and holding Of
such stock in every company and all
matters Of their internal constitution
COMPOSITION
which the state incorporating such
company has exclusive power of regu-
iatfon And erred in holding that the
authorization or forbidding of the cou-
solidation of any two such railway
companies is not within the exclusive
power of the state or states by or un-
I der whose laws they have been incor-
Z porated.
..The court erred in holding that con-
solicitations of railway companies crea-
ted By or under state laws. and conf
petitors in interstate commerce. are ef-
fectual restraints upon such commerce
and that such consultations, though
expressly authorized by state charter,
are violations of said antitrust act and
Illegal
THE court erred in finding and de-
ciding that The reasoning which led to
D the acquisition of that (the said New
Jersey) charter was that while as indi-
viduals the promoters could not by
agreement among themselves place the
, majority of the stock of the two com
peting and parallel railroads in the
+ sons, giving him or them the power 10
: operate the roads in harmony and stihe
n conpetition. yet that the same persons
n might create purely fictitious person
g termed a corporation. which could nelth-
S er think OF act except as they directed.
a and by placing 3he same stock in the
name of such artificial being accom-
Z, plish the same purpose
e .The court erred in holding and de-
L Gliding that the existing combination
n gives to a few men acting IN concert
Z. and in the name Of the Northern Secu-
Il charter the power to control all the
Il means of TRANSFORMATION Of defendant $
o company and to directly control SAID
r company and all their commerce