Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-04-19
q. s. Circuit Court at st.
Paul Renders It's Opinion.
DENIAL rs UNANIMOUS
AS TO HARTMAN APPLICATION
FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE.
Judge Thayer Delivers the Verdict of
the Judges-Gist Of the Rul-
ing in Case.

States circuit court today Judges Sanb0rn,
Thayer, Van Devanter and Hook unani-
rously denied the application Of e. II. Har-
rinan and w. s. Pierce and the Oregon
Short Line Railroad Company for leave to
intervene in the case of the United States
against the Northern Securities Company
on the following grounds:
"First-The plan of the directors Of the
Northern Securities Company for the distri-
button of the stock of the Great Northern
and Northern Pacific railroad companies is
not violative of the decree in the Northern
Securities case.
"Second-No one but the United States
can successfully appeal to the court to en-
join the execution of that plan on the
ground that it is in violation of the Sher-
man antitrust act, and the United States
expresses satisfaction with the present de-
cree.
'Third-The stock of the two railway
companies is not in the custody of the
court.
"Fourth-An intervention is not necessary
to enable the petitioners to protect any Pc
cunlary interest or equity they have"
Judge Thayer delivered the opinion of
the court.
Interest in New York Circles.
NEW YORK, April 19.-Colonel w. P.
Cluugh vice president and general
counsel of the Northern Securities Com
pany, when informed of the denial by
the United States circuit court at st. Paul
of the petition of E. H. Hartman and
Winslow Pierce. regarding the proposed
stock distribution, said that the result was
just what he had expected, but beyond
that statement he refused to express him
self The news aroused much interest In
financial circles, although few of those
more directly interested would express any
opinions in the matter. President J. ].
Hill had not arrived at his office when the
news of the decision was received here.
One Of the counsel for the Northern Sc
curities Company said the decision at st.
Paul will merely throw the application for
an injunction out of court, and any appeal
would not carry with 1T stay OF the pro-
ceedings, because if 1t did so such stay
same Is true, he declared, in the decision
against the Continental Securities Company
rendered at Jersey City yesterday, and If
either case is appealed the appeal will not
prevent the holding of the meeting of the
Northern Securities Company on Thursday,
April q.
Northern Securities stock advanced q
point and half on the curb on the news
that the petition had been denied. Some
$500 shares changed hands In the first
hour. In the general market Union Pacific
declined to a fraction under last night 5
closing. but recovered, and then again de-
clined.
Gist Of the Decision.
ST. PAUL Mimi, April 19-The court, in
discussing the reasons for the decree, after
reciting the grounds put forth by Hartman
and Pierce for leave to intervene, says:
Applications for leave to intervene in a
case after the entry of final decree are
very unusual. They are never granted, as
a matter of course. and owing to the ten
dency Of such applications to occasion de-
lay and prolong the existing litigation, thcy
| ought not to be granted unless it is neces-
sary to do so to preserve some right which
cannot otherwise be protected or to avoid
some comp lication that Is liable to arise.
1.-The principal ground, as 1t seems, on
which the petitioners, Hartman and Pierce
base their application to intervene is that 1t
is necessary to the due enforcement of the
decree that they should be admitted into
the cause as parties and be allowed to raise
further issues and obtain further orders
It is undoubtedly true that supplemental
bill may be filed in case after final de-
cree, for the purpose of fully executing 1T,
when, after the decree is entered, some ac-
ton has been taken or unforeseen events
have occurred which will prevent Its en-
forcement unless some further orders or
directions are given.
But we fail to perceive that further Or
ders are necessary in the case In hand to
insure the due execution of the decree ac-
cording to its terms. The decree was
wholly prohibitory. 1t enjoined the doing
of certain threatened acts, and so long as
these acts are not done it enforces Itself.
and no further action looking to it's enforce
ment is deemed essential.
Disposition of Stock.
when the decree was entered it was as
sumed by the court that when the stock
was thus rendered valueless in the hands of
the securities company the stockholders of
the company would be able and likewise
disposed to make some disposition Of the
stock which under all the circumstances of
the case would be fair and just and would
roSt
where 1t would have some value instead of
being a worthless commodity.
at was thought that the duty of thus
disposing Of it could be safely left to the
stockholders of the securities company and
that II any controversy arose in the dis
charge of this function, in view of the situ-
alton that had been created by the decree,
1t would be q controversy that would prop
erly form the subject matter of an indie
pendent suit between the parties inme-
diately interested.
'It was said In argument that one pur-
pose of the Intervention is to have that
clause of the decree which is now merely
permissive made mandatory But this would
be to modify the provisions of a decree
and make an order which we expressly and
on full consideration declined to make when
the decree was entered. This we must de-
cline to do
Control of the Two Roads.
In speaking of the contentious of Harri-
man and Pierce that the proposed plan Of
disposing of the stock of the Northern Pa
cilc and Great Northern Railroad compa-
niles would result in leaving the control of
the two railroads in the hands of persons
who co-operated In forming the securities
company, the court says:
1.-The issues suggested are disputed and
debatable questions Of fact, which the par
ties would be entitled to litigate with wit
nesses and evidence after leave to inter-
vene had been granted. and we decline to
consider them or the affidayits or excerpts
which present them upon this motion.
According to well-established rules the
petitioner cannot intrude into this Htiga-
ton merely to protect the public interest
so long as the government is present by
it's Attorney General and expresses its dis
approval OF such intrusion The petition
ers can intervene only for the protection of
their own Individual interests, and for that
purpose only. In the event that they can
obtain adequate protection in no other
way.
Stands ON the Decree.
1.-THE United States stands on the decree
as affirmed, and submits that the court is
only concerned to SCI that it is faithfully
observed by the defendants according to
its terms. In view of this declaration on
the part of the United States 1t Is to be
presumed that the government iS f3jepasad