The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-05-23
JOHNSON SCORES
HARRIMAN'S ACTS
Counsel for Northern Securities
Company Says Plaintiff
Sold Out.

Trenton, N. j., May 23.-Argunent
was resumed before Judge Bradford
in the United States circuit court to-
day in the suit brought by e. w. I3ar-
strain the proposed plan Of distribu-
ton of the assets Of the Northern Sc
curities company.
The argument was opened by John
G.. Johnson, representing the North
ern Securities company. He stated
first that the controversy was not one
between the stockholders. Neither
the Northern Securities company had
exceeded their powers.
What is in dispute, he said, is a
plan Of the Northern Securities COM
pany to distribute property which the
cOmplainants claim to be their own.
The case, therefore, stands, he said,
on the question of title to the North
ern Pacific railroad stock which was
formerly owned by Hartman and
Pierce and which was afterwards ac-
quired by the Northern Securities
company.
Mr.. johnson was rather caustic in
his references to Mr.. Hartman, who,
The said, became a director of the
Northern Securities company and by
whose aid the stock acquired by the
Northern Securities company was ac-
quired.
The stock held by Hartman and
Pierce in the Northern Pacific, he
said, was sold to the Northern Secu-
rites ard from that time Hartman
other than the interest common with
the stockholders of the Northern Sc
curities company.
Root Answers Judge.
"The only reason for this litigation"
said Mr.. Root in the course Of his ar
gument for the Northern Securities
company on Saturday, sis that North
ern Pacific stock has gone up from 115
| to 1876, whereas Great Northern has
dropped from 100 to ITO. The COM
plainants want to get back their
$4,000, O00.'
After reading from the supreme
court opinion several paragraphs bear
ing upon the dissolution Of the COM
pany, Mr.. Root said that the plan for
the return of the stock was tentative,
a plan to the exclusion Of any other
plan, but one which seemed entirely
suitable.
Judge Bradford asked: .If the Sc
cuities company did not acquire
equitable ownership Of the shares
treating that as it's property, which
was not its property? There seems tc
be a paradox in the situation
Mr.. Root replied: 1.-THE opinion Of
the circuit court treats of the securi.
ties company as owner of the stock in
question. Also in Justice Harlan's
Eopinion, it is set forth that the. Secnri.
ties company was the owner of the
stock, thus approving the opinion, Of
the circuit court. It is also described
In Justice Harlan's opinion as a hold.
ing corporation and trustee. There
can be no question Of the title Of the
company. Whatever has been the
rights Of those Joining in the combi.
nation the supreme court decree shows
no disposition to interfere with them.
Hartman and Pierce with thei
eyes open forewent any further rights
1 In the stock disposed Of by them
Their present idea was to secure fo
themselves Northern Pacific stock
! which had gone up, and to leave al
other stockholders of the Northern
i Securities to serve themselves as hes
they could out Of what was left AM
out Of what Hartman and Pierce ii
their bill claimed had deprecated Il
/ value.