Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-02-20

lnes ana opinion of the interstate cnn.
, .,I commission are not evidence I'm
this case and declared that no had No
power 10 enforce the sherman az 80
quoteu numerous legal decisions 10 sun
p port OF ms assertion. The decision then
continued; '"ei
ONE GROUND EXISTS.
.,,,. There ei, is but one ground upon which
ms Din can be maintained IN tha
Union Pacific has no right IN Inv roi1 9
OF own either, the Illinois Central o,.
we securities company. or eItbe, s
WAlIs Is intruding in this election
nhohy without right. then thint, hone
,,ae sSt,oeknolders without alleging ire
throw them or It out. ~
rms brings us to tho question e.
mere IN the public policy of this st..n
pIohloition against the voting b,, , 80,
elel corporation OF stock in a domestic
asiioIation which stock, II purchased
anu pald Tor, and holds under an ex-
OF It's creation"
me court declared that cornora+iop.
,ei sc are not barred from using ANA
I~ls,iils the stock of other corporatiors
ana sad that the fact that the ~
enaser might be a foreign Corporation
anu me stock Of that of a domestic
Fsttta
OF law. He said: '''e 'ul'
MUST FIND BETTER REASON
The reason why purchases Of mo
STOCK or the Illinois Central nv ~
1niou Pacihc and the Railroad secnrt-
;, rvs hpdny are invalid, If they arc
ihFald must be found elsewbera 49,,
In the fact that they are foreie,, ' cn,.l
porations." ioielgh cor
me court denied that there is onv
49,, ~ OF the american common law nro-
nIolting one corporation from boIdin,-
s s IN another corporation when the
ni6S CORPORATION has In its charter spe-
enc power to do so. In this case ~,
SAID II was proved and not deniaJ
mat the Union Pacific ana the Pan,
road Securities company. each hae ~
20 ess power granted to II by the state
VI It's creation to buy, own and hold
s'ock In other corporations.
me court then entered upon q Iong
and extensive discussion Of yorio,,s
statutes regarding the holding OF stocir
py corporations in other cornorattons
ueViaIlns nnally that such holdings arc
mol prohibited by law. nor opposed 70
'he pubic policy. He then said:
RULE ON VOTING STOCK.
The right of the Railroad Securities
company to vote itE Illinois Central
STOCK is unimpaired by the fact Tho.
the Union Pacific owns practicail,, -,
Oh us stock. go long as the yotinr.
power OF the Securities company Is useS
IN lawful manner, and for Inu,,,,i
purposes. II is imamterial who owns ,ts
stock" 49, "N 40 rs
Inc decision further declared thst thu
enron racine and the Illinois Central
are NOT competing, but connecting lines
thu tnat the Union Pacific under its
and the laws of Utah zoe
clear right In m oha
illinois Central which 1t purchased in
$40 ana that II has the essential righr
% vote tnat stock at meetings OF the
stockholders OF the Illinois Central. un-
ess the right is forbidden by the laws
or public policy of Illinois. The court
sara IN conclusion on this subject:
such prohibition does not exist I'M
ess II affirmatively appears. 1t Is not
established by the mere lack OF leeisla
lion upon that subject"
JUDGE BALLS CONCLUSION.
In concluding his decision Judge Ball
said: D"'i
THE usual office of a prelimInarv In
junction Is to continue the status quo
ihtll the mai hearing. To sustain this
Injunction and thus To pre-
Ient the Union Pacific and the Railroad
securities company from voting their
'tock at the coming election would be
~ t""tbI VIC status quo before the
lght or these corporations 10 own ana
'ote such stock has been fully and
lnally determined by the court with
hose conditions barred out, the meet
ng might result In an entire change
n the management OF the Illinois Gem
raj TO dissolve the injunction and
Il the action OF the court in regard IL
he ownership and voting power Of mia
took await the final hearing means NO
acre than the continuance OF the pres
nj management with the change ar
nc director only and he, eight of the
rector defendants swear. will be an
bic, competent man, neither controlled
or connected by or with the Union
aeinc The balance OF conve,.ienca
nd Inconvenience Is clearing with the
efsndants.
II am Of the opinion that the secur,-
es company and the Union Pacific
ave ownership OF the shares Of the
.ock they hold in Illinois Central, in
uding the right to vote that stock az
ne coming meeting OF stockholders,
al that such right to vote is not for
dden by the statutes of this state, or
Y decisions of our supreme court. nor
the public policy OF Illinois.
"The motion 70 dissolve tho injune.
on IL allowed"
The attorneys FOR Mr. Fish agreed
at the opinion OF Judge Ball could
y be appealed from.
IT is non-appealable orderr said
tty. Farrar, between pufrs from
ack Havana, the merits OF the case
ust now be tried. decree entered
I'd then we viii be able to take an
peal"
''Will yon go ahead 10 try the merits
the case2" was asked.
Yes" replied Atty. Farrar
AS soon as the matter Is reached.
lere are issues raised in this pro-
no." ""S
AZ the orrico OF stuyyesant Fish II
Is said that Mr.. Fish would make
comment on the case until he had
IN the text OF the decision.