The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-07-16

the combination and which amounted
to about 5000, 900. The contention of
the Northern Securities company was
that the stock had become the absolute
property of that company and that it
was perfectly legal for the Northern
Securities company to carry out the pro
rata plan of distribution upon which
the company had agreed. Hartman
contended that by reason of the corpo-
ration being declared illegal by the
United States supreme court, the title
mad not passed from Hartman and
PIERCE, and in consequence they were
entitled TO have returned, to them the
particular stock they had put into the
combination and which Involved con-
troll OF the Northern Pacific company.
Main Points Introduced
The decision of Judge Bradford does
not dispose OF the main points at is
sue in the case, which were whether
or not Hartman and Pierce should
have returned to them the stock of the
Northern Pacific company which they
put into the Northern Securities COM
pany, or. whether they should have dis
trfbuted to them the stock of both the
Northern Pacific and Great Northern
companies on the pro rata basis pro-
sylded for by the directors of the North
XII OScaT3i1SS- company.
- Judge Bradford deyotes most of his
opinion to the discussion of legal
question as to whether he should grant
"a preliminary Injunction, and he takes
the position that as long as there. is any
doubt in the case and no injury can
come to the eomplainants a preliminary
injunction should be granted. He says
1urther that the failure to grant a
preliminary injunction would permit
the distribution of the stock in the
Northern Pacific company to which
Hartman and Pierce claim title and put
the compliments in a position where
they would not be able to secure relief
to which they would be entitled should
the case be decided in their favor on
final hearing.
The judge also said that a preIimi-
nary injunction should only be refused
where it was absolutely positive that
the compliments could not win tie
case when it came to a final hearing.
The compliments were entitled, he
said, to benefits Of every reasonable
doubt as to the disposition of the case
when it should come up on final hear
Ing, and he intimated that it was not
always easy to anticipate judicial de-
c1sion, even when all the facts had
been presented. In the present case
he stated there were number of
points upon which it would be neces-
sary for the presentation of more. evil
dence than is now before the court.
Effect of Courts Action
|. Judge Bradford, in discussing the
advisability of granting a preliminary
injunction, said that such an injunc-
ton would not interfere with the op-
GRAFTON of either railroad, nor would
1t be injurious to the public. He said
it might be contended that the injunc-
ton would interfere with the distri-
button of dividends on the stock of the
+ Northern Securities company, or at
least on part OF that stock, but that
1t was within the courts power to re-
quire bonds to protect any stockholder
from possible losses.
Judge Bradford in his decision does
not provide for the form of a decree
and asks that form be submitted to
him. In granting preliminary in
junction the Judge has followed prac-
tically the policy that controlled Judge
Kirkpatrick when the latter granted
an injunction restraining the Pennsyl-
vania Railroad company from taking
down the poles and wires Of the West
ern Union Telegraph company when
the company had been ordered to re-