New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-04-19
COURT UPB0LDS PLAN.
Northern Securities Meeting Is Not
Enjoined.

IN. ,oeosai meeting OF the stockholders % the
Northern Securities Company VII De heio Ia AZ
token Tomorrow. Nice-Chancelor bergen II
Jersey City yesterday dismissed the apphcanon
for an Injunction 20 restrain the company from
meeting The United States Supreme Court re-
Gently decided that the practical merger OF 'ne
Great Northern and the Northern Pacinc haliWay
ooupanies into the Northern Securities Company
rvas Illegal and q plan was adopted by which the
last named company 70 reduce us caTllaI
about % Pc cent. and restore TO the holders OF
the stock the bulk OF their investment IN STOCK OF
the two original companies, Great Northern ano
Northern Pacific. The special meetns was CaIieu
20 ratify this plan.
The plan was opposed by Charles H Nenner
president OF the Continental Securities Company
who holes 500 shares OF the Northern Securl1es
Company's stock He applied for the injunctlon
oontendng that the Northern Securities Company
should return 70 the original holders the stock Of
the two companies that they delivered for the
stock OF tho Northern Securities Company. wnich
has no good reason for continuing even the sem
hlance OF an existence. and that they would receive
only sss OF stock for each SEQ Of stock ny the
plan OF the directors.
The Northern Securities Company was represent
&c az the hearing yesterday by John ". Grigss, e1-
United States Attorney General Robert McCarter.
the Attorney General OF New-Jersey and Charles
/. Corbin Thomas Thatcher, the former law part
ner OF the late Thomas B Reed appeared for a
large number Of stockholders, and Charles Thomp-
son Represented the contestant When the hearing
opened Mr.. McCsrter read an afhGavit OF I'd
ward 7 Nichols, secretary and treasurer OF the
Northern Securities Company. TO show that the
numerous transfers and divisions made II IN
possible 10 trace the original holders OF the STOCK
that had been turned into and exchanged Tor that
Of the Securities company. 1dr Thompson at once
moved that the treasurer be cited TO appear ana
produce his books Mr.. Corbin opposed this notion
SAYING that Mr. Thompson hs6 failed 10 make out
a case and vas fishing FOR facts on which 10 make
ona and that the courts discountenance such hsn-
ing expeditions. Mr. Thompson retorted thai me
real defence is that they cannot traos oaHA me
original holders but II should be an easy clerical
task 70 ascertain the original holders. and me
treasurer and his books should be brought INTO
court
DO You contend that the statement OF MI
Nichols Is untrleg' inquired the Vice Chancellor.
We TO-" replied Mr. Thompson. and that II is
their only defence The affidavit Of Nr. Nichols
shows that they can trace up the holders Of nine
teen-txenieths OF the original stock
Mr.. Thatcher declared that the proceedings were
merely dlatory. and the stockholders were 5eipg
injured BY the delay. as the majority fayOred The
unaer tho peculiar circumstances. 49,.
ar Thompson continued his argument against
the proposed distribution plan, and recited the
terms q She oeIee 81 Se ~ Si 1S Nc Sl5s5eT
with the comment: That Is TO say. you can own
your own horse but must not u6e it,"
can own re g69I 6n N house, S But y Tih t rent
Mr.. Thompson, resuming. maintained that me
20 them the stock they turned in 10 the Securities
Company. and said that the reason for holding ne
! per cent was vague and indefinite, ana the hold
ers were not allowed to exercise their discretion
whether they should continue in the Securities
Company not. and nothing was revealed con-
corning the future OF the Securities Company.
Mr.. Griges maintained that the company is act
ing In equitable manner. and the afiidaVirs OF
more than tHo-thrds OF the stockholders show that
they assent 10 the plan. lie asked for the discharge
OF the rule.
Mr. McCarter argued that Tenner did not acquire
the 500 shares OF stock until after the decision and
subsequent the adoption Of the plan for the dis
trfbutiOn Of the stock. and conscious Of the
fact when he became the holder OF the stock.
Vice Chancellor Bergen in dismissing the appli-
cation for the injunction. said he would file his
reasons later. he could not from the argu-
ments made he said any reasonable ground for
an Injunction. The stock is asset. and can be
disposed OF any other asset The courts must be
reasonable. he said, and the plan Of distribution
seemed fair each stOckholGer Will receive the
same percentage. The complainant. he said. had
acquired his stock after the plan Ct distribution had
been announced. and had knowledge OF the
scheme.