The Bon Homme County independent. [volume] (Tabor, S.D.) 1904-1913, 1911-06-29
RAILROAD MERGER
ADJUDGED LAWFUL
BY COURT RULING
Suit Against Hartman Brought
Under Roosevelt Regime, De-
oided Adversely to U. S.

that the purchase of the Southern Pa
cific by the Union Pacific did not
amount to a direct and substantial
restraint of either interstate or in
ternatiopal commerce.
The recent decision Of the United
States supreme court IN the Standard
Oil case was cited among others by
Judge Elmer b. Adams, who wrote
The majority opinion. Supreme Court
Justice Willis Van De Vanter. while
participated In the hearing delibera-
ton and conclusion in the: case and
concurred In the opinion.
Judge William c. Hook filed dis
senting opinion,
'Opinon of Majority.
The majority decision was mailed
to the clerk of the court here. The
only question. read the opinion, was
whether the Union Pacific company,
extending only from Omaha and KAN
sas City on the east to Ogden on the
west, was competing line prior to
1901 for trancontinental business with
The Southern Pacific company, whose
dne extended from New York on the
last over the sea to New Orleans and
hence by rail to San Francisco and
Portland on the west?
while the Union Pacific was en-
irely dependent upon the Southern
Pacific for its connection westward.
he Southern Pacific was not at all
dependent upon the Union Pacific for
is connection eastward" reads the
majority opinion.
Our conclusion" continued the
opinion, SIS that all the facts OF this
,ase, considered in their natural,
'easonable and practical aspect and
siven their appropriate relative sig
iifcance, do not make the Union Pa
life substantial competitor for
ranscontinental business with the
Southern Pacific. in or prior 20 the
ear 1901.
I'VE, therefore, pass to considera-
ion of some less important matters
'elied upon by the government to
establish destruction of competition
'etween those companies.
Confisoation Not Intended
Certainly the desire to appropriate
he trifiing business done by the South
I'm Pacific on the minor lines, or to
Mppress competition in traffic which
vas in the aggregate Of such a small
proportion should not have been the in
piration OF the vast outlay involved
the purchase Of the Huntington
took. 1t did not amount to direct
md substantial restraint OF either in
erstate or internal commerce. This Is
Tot sufficient to bring it within the
condemnation Of the antitrust law.
This concludes consideration Of tho
fleet of the transaction chiefly relied
ipon by the government in this case.
But IT is contended that the purchase
w the Union Pacific, OF controlling
interest in the stock of the Northern
Pacific company was also violative Of
he antitrust law.
without dwelling on the reason for
he purchase of this stock disclosed
n the preceding statement OF facts,
4o er.ff sntT . Il,
rolling interest was thereby acquired
was lost some time before this suit
was instituted, and that none of that
stock is now held by, or for, the I'm
on Pacific company.
LAS there is no showing OF any
ike ambitious project in this respect
Tor the future, we fail to discover any
opportunity or reason for the injunc-
i've relief on this account"
Tho Santa Re Purchase.
The court held also that the invest
nent of the. Hartman lines in the
Santa Fe was not for acquiring control.
and that il it was for obtaining in
side information concerning the oper-
alton of great competitor they chose
4 lawful way for doing it.
THE conclusions of fact dispose of
this CASE the opinion concluded,
without the necessity Of determining
the question much debated in brief and
argument whether securing control OF
the Southern Pacific company by pur-
chasing stock of individual owners
could In any view Of the case have
contravened the antitrust law. On the
facts Of this case with all their reason
able and fair differences we conclude
that the government has failed to SUBJ
stantiate the averments OF its bill"
Justice Van De Vanter, while a cir
a,,ik 4,y1a arxfa ix tAI IT,. -
elaboration and cOnclussok IN this case
and he now concurs in, this opinion.
The bill must be dismissed and a de-
| cree will be entered to that effect"
The merger, according to the court,
did not cause a change in rates. no
| complaints Of discrimination and no
+, conspiracy. Concerning these features
| the opinion read:
Tho proof shows that after 1901 as
| well as before, the rates for trans CON
.inental traffic were the same over both
| the Union Pacific and Southern Pa
| ,ific railroads. There has since then
been, with respect to either of these
| ines, no impairment of service, no dis
| continuance of efforts to satisfy the
public and no complaints of shippers
| If any inferior or inadequate service.
Are Better Roads.
,, ION the contrary, hundreds Of mil
lOIio VI ooilbi iihFC SiiilC lJNl ptSH
| expended on both roads. The physical
condition has been vastly improved and
| heir efficiency for public service as well
as for private profit has been greatly
enhanced. The whole. proof taken to-
sether, we think, fails 20 disclose any
conspiracy to restrain interstate COM
nerce or foreign commerce in violation
! Of the first section Of the act.
1.-THE same consideration led to the
| sonclusion that no combination, or con-
| ;piracy 90 monopolize. or attempt to
! nonopolize trade, or commerce among
the states, or with foreign nations was
entered into. Moreover, the fact that
| the Union Pacific company did not Sc
cure the control of the Santa Fe road,
| thoroughly sufficient, well equipped
| md powerful rival for ,transcontinental
! business or the Denver & Rio Grande,
| potential and later an actual and
| ,owerful rival for the same business
Iffords additional and conclusive evil
! lence of no such combination or con-
| piracy.
The governments suit In equity
! against the Southern Pacific Railroad
| company and the Union Pacific Rail-
| road company to enjoin the continued
tcontrol of the former by the latter was
! fled in Salt Lake City, Ut-h, February
\ 2. 1908. The bill charged conspiracy
and the formation OF & combination In
violation of the sherman Antitrust act
| paaee1 hu nOpprp9s N prafept traIa and