Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1904-04-18
HEAR MERGER SUIT
HARTMAN PETITION ARGUED AT
ST. PAUL,
Former Secretary Root Makes State
mcnt for Securities Company
Attorney General Knox Makes
Formal Objection TO Granting
Petition for intervention.

81. 1 dui, hpiii ia great leRd
battle by corporation lawyers whose
names are familiar throughout the
United States is being waged in the
United States circuit court before
Judges Sanborn. Vandeventer. Hook
and Thayer, the action being based or
motion presented to the court 10y +
II. Hartman ct al, for leave to file an
Intervening petition for the purpose OF
showing why the Northern SECURITIES
Company's officials should not carry
out plan of distribution of the asset.
of the recently declared illegal North
ern Securities Company in name,
alleged to be inimical to the interest.
of Hartman and Pierce The attor
neys representing the plaintiffs are w
d. Guthrie, R. S. Lovett, general coun
sci of the Southern Pacific; Judge J
NJ. Baldwin, of Omaha, and Maxwell
Evarts, of Ohio. The defendants arr
represented by Elihu Root, former sec.
reatry of war; John &. johnson. OF
Philadelphia; Francis Lynde Stetson
counsel for j. P Morgan & Co. George
Young, Frank B. Kellogg and G. A.
Severance; also &. W. Bum general
counsel of the Northern Pacific, and
M. ID. Grover, general counsel for the
Great Northern. Besides this array of
talent the United States government
was represented by District Attorney
Z. c. Houpt, who presented an objec-
ton to the Intervention under the di-
rectiOn of United States Attorney Gen.
eral Knox.
United States Objects.
This Intervention was something of
surprise to the petitioners, who were
not aware of it until after Mr.. Evarts
had opened the case for the plaintiffs,
when Judge Sanborn asked him if he
was aware that the United States gov
eminent objected to the intervening
petition. The court then directed Mr.
Houpt to read the objection of Mr.
Knox, which is as follows:
81 respectfully submit to the court
that notice has been served upon me
that Edward H. Hartman, Winslow
5. Pierce and the Oregon Short Line
Railroad Company will apply to the
judges of this court for leave to inter-
vene in this case and to proceed and
to be heard in respect of the final de-
cree of this court entered on April 8,
1908, as affirmed by the supreme court
of the United States, and for such 9TH
er or further or different order OF relief
as the court may deem fit. The Unit
ed States neither admits nor denies the
allegations of the petition, but objects
to the proposed intervention. This
case was heard by this court on bill,
answer and testimony and final de-
cree was entered, enjoiring the defend
ants as therein recited. Upon appeal
10y the defendants to the supreme court
of the United States the decree of this
court was affirmed in every particular,
the effect of which was to end and
close the case. The United States
stands ON the decree as affirmed, and
submits that the court is only concern
ed to see that it is faithfully observed
by the defendants according to its
terms.
p. G. KNOX,
Attorney General
Mr.. Evarts in his statement contend
ed that the Securities Company in its
final distribution of the assets intended
to take a course which would continue
the common conrtol of the Great
Northern and Northern Pacific rail
ways to the detriment of the plaintiff
and cntinued violation of the Sher-
man law.
Mr.. Roots Argument.
Mr. Root contended that there was
no warrant in the general rules of
practice, in the DEGREES of the courts
nor in the statutes for this interven-
ton He said the decree of this court
was limited to the simple command
''thou shalt not and nothing was eX-
pected but absolute obedience.
The arguments of both Mr. Root and
Mr. Evarts occupied less than an hour 5
time. but every word was followed
with the closest attention by the
throng of attorneys and spectators who
crowded the court room, the galleries
and who sat on tables and steps leading
10 the tribunal.
Mr.. Roots argument was finished
lust before noon, and when the court
resumed at o'clock Judge Lovett be-
gan his argument on behalf of the pc
titioners He began with the conten-
ton that if the Northern Securities
Company had been the legal owner of
the stock of the Northern Pacific and
Great Northern companies it would
have been entitled to the fruits of that
ownership and the attorney general
would not have obtained the relief he
sought in the original suit.
The foundation of the bill in that
case was that the stock had been ac-
uuired and held for illegal purposes.
The decree of the court had determin-
I'D that no title to the stock ever passed
to the Northern Securities company
because that company was not legally
capable of holding such title. The
decree had the further effect of giving
the court practical custody OF the
stock of the Northern Securities Com
pany.
Tho co,,ct I'D ;our,,ad tho case until