The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-04-13
Ridicule for Union Pacific.


mo doubt the counsel who is yet to
address you will tell what beneficial
effect will come from giving these
shares over to the Union Pacific Rail
road company, and how that act
would accrue to the public interest.
We have not heard it yet. Whence
this new-found zeal for the public
interest? They come to you with the
voice of Jacob, but lift the cover and
you will find the hairy hand Of Esau.
THE fact is that these people who
contributed a majority of the shares
Of the Northern Pacific will receive
back, under this system Of distribu-
ton, less than a quarter. Is this Diet
rimental to the public interest? The
| petitioners plan Of distribution, ac-
cording to their contention, will give
| them a majority of the shares of the
| Northern Pacific. Under the proposed
plan, the shares will be scattered
among 5000 individual holders. This
new-found champion Of the public
rights finds this an invasion, altho
the attorney general does not see
any disturbance Of the public interest.
Should Bring Another Action.
1.-THE petitioner also alleges that he
is personally, and, in his capacity as
trustee, injureds by this plan of dis
tribution.. The decree of this court
had nothing to do with the distribu-
ton Of shares. How can that claim
be adjusted without an independent
proceeding, marshalling all the par.
ties interested? What prevents them
tomorrow, if the court denies this
application, from going into another
court with such an application? Theil
rights cannot be prejud1ced by the
decision on this application.
Suppose the Northern Securitie:
company had chosen to retain these
shares, tho not allowed to vote then
or to draw dividends. Would tina
have been in violation of the court!
decree? Would these petitioners have
had any right to come into this cour
with such a petition? If the compan!
had taken any action in violation O.
the decree, you could have summoned
the officers for contempt. If the at
torney general. had seen any viola
/ ton Of the decree, and had desired
= to come before you with a petition
) you would have heard him. But he l
. satisfied, and what right have thes
petitioners to come in with such al
: application, extending this case far be
l yond the scope Of the act under Wh1cl
= the action was brought?
!. Was Not q Prohibition.
= Judge Lovett, preferring to be logi
3 cal rather than correct in his facts
claims that the decree prohibits tn
l CORPORATION from selling these shares
y The decree permitted the return o
! these shares, but did not prohibit tn
e corporation from any other course Q
L. action. Counsel is wrong in maintain
9 ing that this language amounted t
a positive direction or prohibition"
8 Mr.. johnson quoted literally fror
: the opinion of Judge Harlan, definin
: the power of the federal court owe
v g. state corporation. It could onl
a prevent such a corporation from vic
e lating the federal laws. That actio
r had been fully taken by the court
: decree. He remarked that 1t mu:
: be extreme gratificauon TO the cou'
k to have been sustained both in the le
: ter and spirit of its decision by a ma
iority of the supreme court. Mr.. Joh1
e son continued:
- Want Greater Punishment.
IS "Yet. after this decision, and the II
fiction of this punishment, now CONF
= the petitioners and say that they wal
more punishment. They want the q
cree to go farther and fnf1ict great
punishment, but they want the vicar
Gus sort of punishment, that falls upt
- someone else. In all my experience
never have seen a more gracele
proposition advanced than by the
private suitors, appearing in the gui
l. of public benefactors. Let us separa
:, their capacities, and look on them,
4 as men burning with zeal for the pu
- lie, but as private suitors for the
: own interests, as co-sinners. Tn
Ii were directors and continually co
I suited in all the steps. After t
= courts decree, it would have been
p calamity to the stockholders to ord
If a sale of the stock. In their interes
it was decided to make an equitab
~ pro rata distribution. Yet they wa
to profit by the falling in the price
!; shares, so as to get more than tn
~ nut in. Where is the equity in tina
~ It is not equity, it is. iniquity.
10 There have been $4,000 transfe
h OF. these stocks. The world has be
dealing In them. Yet the purchase
of these stocks, who bought, Mort
% ern Securities. not knowing what tn
Represented, whether Northern Paci