The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-04-10

--sSiSS-s -As.A>
zot, from entering Into those private; con.
tracts which directly ana subs tahtially
nnd not Ia ts1y sindireotly remotely IN
cidentally ana cpilateraiiy irestiiates to- a
1ns a9ste e leg degree commerce aofia
CLEARLY tJNrDN Able.
Learned Counsel FOR the defendants
further contend 5as follows. "a 4! e nv
8t'1rhat the ant .tftist law was not intend.
cd 10 lholide Or prohibit cot1pinatlors
looking to the virtual consolidation q
| parallel and competing lines OF railroads.
and finally, thAt this com bifintiun proven,
was one FORMED TN aid Of commerce and
not to restrain IL; II, other words. Il was
ono formed 20 enlarge the volume OF In
lic n 3 q w III n IN I, 3 5 n Y q III N
'erhe court cannot assent to either Of
these PROPOSE tons. The first, we think, ~
clearly untcnable Tor the reasons all
ready stated. 4 Concerning the second con.
| tcntlon, we observe TINT IL Would BE a
novel, not 10 say X absurd sintorpretatioi1.
Of the anti trust act 70 hold that afer an
unlawful combination Is formed, II must
be left In possession Of tho power that
|lt has ACQUIRED, WITH FUN freedom @ ok 9. !.
"Relative to tbs stf,ird contention, which
has been pressed with great sosi an0
ability, this may be said : IT may be.
that suof ID a virtual consolidation on a
PARALLEL and competing lines Of railroad
MS has boon effected Is beneficial TO tho
public rather than harmful It may DO
blnatlon were wholly laudnhle and tlfl-t
selfish, that tho combination was form-
Ell by the defendants to protect great
interests. or that the combination was
the, initial and necessary step in the ac-g
complishment8Gof great designs which
would prove 70 be Of incstmable value.
We shall not affirm or deny either
OF these propositions, because they pre-
sent lssues which we are not called upon
to detormine, and some OF them involve
questions which are not thin tho pros
vince OF any court to decide, Involving as
they do. questions OF public policy which (
Congress must determine It Is our duty
to ascertain whether tho proof discloses a
com bnation IN direct restraint OF Inter-
state commerce. that Is to sny. q com
bination whereby tho power fhas been NO n
quircd 70 suppress competition between
two or more competing and parallel lines
OF railroad engaged In Interstate com
merce. If IT does disclose such a combi-a
nation, and we have little hesitation m
answering this d uestion IN the afiirma-
tive, then the %antl-trust not, as II has
been heretofore interpreted by the court
of last resort i, has been violated and the
government Is entitled to a decree.
4, STHE deer ED.
3 A decree IN favor Of the United States
will accordingly be entered to the fol-
lowing effect:S Adjudging that the STOCK elsa
of the Northern Pacific and Great North,
ern Companies, now held by the Securi-5
ties Company,Swas acquired in virtue OF
a combination among the defendants, IN
restraint Of trade and commerce among
the several States, such as the anti
trust act denounces rs illegal; enjolnlng
the Securities Company from acquiring
or attempting to acquire further stock
OF other Y Of said companies; also en-
Joining itlfrom$ voting such stock at any
meeting OF the stockholders OF either OF
said railroad companies or exercising or
tempting to8exercise any control, d.
trection or supervision or. influence over
the acts OF said companies. or either Of
them. by virtue Of It's holding such I
stock: enjointng tho Northern Pacific
lively, their officers. directors and agents
from permitting such stock tc he voted
by tho Northern Securities Company, or
any OF its agents or attorneys on It's be-
half, Mt anys corpora te election for direc-
tors or officers OF either OF said COM
,pnnles, and likewise enjolnlng them from
paying any dividends to the Securities
Company on account OF said stock or
permitting or suffering the Securities
Company to N exercise X any control
whatsoever over the corporate acts
said companies or to direct the
policy Of either; and, finally per-
hitting the Securities Company to re-
turn and transfer to the stockholders Of
a. Nv v-s, o. - \
Companies any and all shares OF stock
Of those companies which 1t may have
received from such stockholders in ex-
change for It's own stock. or to mali
such transfer and assignment to such
person or persons as ire now the holders
and owners OF its own stock originally
issued in exchange for the stock OF said
companies" 3f5 Ell NJ XII si5ES
y Circuit Judges Caldwell, sanborn.
,Thayer and Van Devanter heard the case
and all concurred In the opinion. which
was written by Judge Thayer and fled .
In st. Louis at the same time 1t was
handed down in the United States Cir-f
cult Court OF Appeals in this city.
y The defendants are: The Northern Sc
5curites Company the Northern Pacific
Railway Company. James j. Hill, VIII
liam P, Clough, D.$FWillls. James, John
S. Kennedy, j. Plerpont Morgan. Rob.
.ert Bacon, George T.. Baker and Daniel
s! Lamont. 5S3
! NoRGAN's VIEW or IT.
\ j. Pierpont Morgan said: Until soc
the full text OF the decision I should not
care to express an opinion on It. This
much is certain. however: It will not rest
where It Is. s9s {;s a III
1.-THE question OF the right Of two or
more railroads tosbe operated by q hold
Ing company will be taken to tho United
States Supreme Court at Washington.
Instead Of looking upon the Decision OF
the court to day as a blow to railroad en-
terprIse should say that tho reverse IS
the case. Capital all over the country.
is anxious to know It's rights in tho
matter OF railroad oonstru cton and OPS
Grafton. Railway, men want to know
where they stand. i3@% 81 "a IS 8
1.-THE decision to-day Is Just one step
closer to a decision from the United States
Supreme Court, which shall be final for
even II the Northern Securities had Won
to-day, the governments attorney would
probably have appealed. se ~