Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1913-02-10
su,s r,on~rnurs ieA,

communication, travel and transportation
so far as the public and the government
are concerned. as one connected con-
tinuous line, and it provided that at any
time within three months after the entry
of the mandate in the district court
plan for the disposition of the Southern
Pacific stock adjudeed TO be unlawfully
held by the Union Pacific, might be pre-
scented by the government or the de-
PENDANTS to the district court and that
nothing in the opinion of the court should
be considered as preventing any such
party from presenting plan which. while
destroying the unlawful combination inso-
far as the Union Pacific had secured con-
troll of the competing line of road ex-
tending from New Orleans and Galveston
to San Francisco and Portland would
permit the Union Pacific TO secure the
Central Pacific connection from Ogden to
San Francisco and thereby to control that
line to the coast. thus effecting such
continuity of the Union Pacific and Cen
trail Pacific from the Missouri river 10
San Francisco as was contemplated by
the acts of Congress under which they
We're constructed.
Following the rendering of this decis-
ion. negotiations were opened with the
attorney general by the representatives
of the Union Pacific Railroad Co., the
latter proposing to offer the Southern Pa
cidc stock held by it for subscription pro
rata TO and among its own stockholders.
The attorney general declined TO accede
to this proposition, but finally expressed
his Willingness to agree to a plan which
should offer the stock for sale to the
stockholders of both the Southern Pacific
and the Union Pacific Cos. pro rata. This
being unsatisfactory to the Union Pacific
Co. all parties agreed TO submit TO the
supreme court petition asking for a
further definition of its decision by in
structing the district court to whether
or not the pro rata distribution of the
Southern Pacific stock among the stock
holders of the Union Pacific Railroad Co
would be regarded as eQsnpiiance with
the decision of the supreme court. The
supreme court on January.6 answered this
inquiry in the negative ana It's opinion
contained the following ciause~&
I'm rejecting the plan for the transfer
of the Southern Pacific Cos. stock held
for the Union Pacific Co. either by distri-
button or sale, to the stockholders of the
Guide the district court from considering
and acting upon plans which may be sub
mitted to il under the former opinion and
decree of the court
THE significance of this second refer
ence by the supreme court to a plan
which should separate the Central Pacific
Railroad from the Southern and secure
the Union Pacific the direct line TO San
Francisco contemplated by the acts of
Congress was accepted by the attorney
general as an intimation of the line
which should be pursued in working out n
plan for the dissolution of the unlawful
combination He therefore insisted that
any plan presented by the defendants
must be designed to secure such results
The negotiations had proceeded on that
basis and the agreements finally execut-
ed are in compliance with the require
ments which the attorney general has in
sisted upon as essential to a complete
dissolution of the unlawful combination
and the restoration of effective competi-
tive conditions between the Union Pa
cific and the Southern Pacific systems. .