The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-13

ne cn.S rso.S oosxo, ne r manning director p DO
date Dec. g. 1854 In pursuance this contract and a
two subsequent Instruments execused BY the Union RAN
road Company, the city Of Troy Issued !ts bonds
70 the amount in all Of s7O7 600, caused them 70
be Negotiated, and paid , over he proceeds rs
To explain theabove should be that the oriensi
contract only contemplated the issue Of bonds 70 Mo
smoont u 100000 But it having been found that thS
insufficient, to complete their road Nc they sub
sequeitly called the city for further means At df.
tmes and executed ne two Instruments above re-
fegrtd to for the parpose VI securing the city for
such additional issues Of bonds IN tho Same
The fir, additional issue bonds amounted 70 $4,000,
ami the ST 900, which last payable In
one three and four s Soos ,s with sss
vary the time Of mcnt from ten twenty wh
interest half yearly on lt Of January and July N sash
ubsequcn provisions tor increasing the amount 70 DO
resd by the city the ,O -four .aross Sompnso
each ndemnyug the CITY as to onequArter Of the prnci
raj and interest Of the bonds issued aud agreeing THAI
if in every half year the entire net income of he Onion
Railroad should be sufficient to pay the city the
of per for the frat i've years, and thereafter tha
ued each Of the four corporations would forthwith pay 70
the city such n within the ent re net income apr
toned raeably among the whole amount Of ouch bonds
would make up percentage TO he ed each Of ho
bonds con aiming aso provision that al any do
fault the part Of the Troy Union Railroad Company 70
Tey such principal and interest they should la duo the
city should first resort 10 It's re- nedy ON and undr the
mortgage. The road and passenger house. d the Unioo
RailOa. Company 1lseed and in operation abOus
the I'D Of Feb, 1854, have since been and are now
utea by the -four companies, who continued 70 pay tho
various periods in le and fall they ceased 70
Jay their dues. By reason OF this failure, tho
unlon n, s S;lS ,S COMPANY was not IN IN funds
Oh principal aud interest it's bonds which fell due tho
lst Of October 1880, amounting 70 ss,ss7 o. and me
further amount Of Interest on said bends S000) which
became due the lst Ct january, 1857 These amounts
tie city compelled to elsewhere in order t. pro
city has commenced an action against the Union
Railroad and the four other companies, m
charges that the Umon Railroad Company has been
guilty OF violation Of duty in failing enforce the pay
ment Of dues from The other comanies and thus putting
hey end power its obligations the city; ana
that three of the companies, 10 w.t. the New York Gen.
us Troy ana sos'o' ana hSdsoo hSer Oossp'rns 70
Ielng the city to forecose its mortgage, have wfuly
Company. That the Union Railroad Company is In.
solvent snd unable 10 meet its obligations and Aag
other properly except thai morgaged " the city and
has other sources except such are derived from the
tolls i'm osed the other That the bonds Of Two
Of the companies viz the Troy aud Boston and the nud
RIVER are the plaintiff belle yes, wholly insuHAcena
indemnify the city for the amounts guaranteed BY
them IN. B-There be little doubt Of THO entire ina
billy ofthe Troy and Boston road to meet its liability on
| is 6oids) 1t alleges that the city has already been
obliged by the default Of the railroad com anies 70 adj
vance nearly 80 AND taas s hresisned VIII sun
and interest Of ts bonds thont any SUFFICIENT indemnity
10 that portion guaranteed by the Troy and Boston and
Hudson River roaos, by reason II inability 70 respsnd IN
large amount II also charges that tho Union Rail.
read Company, hronsh the action Of considerable nae
L
\ by said three cornranies-s . party to their viii
| rul violations Of duty and good faith, and that
thereby the value Of the securities held by the city ~
greatly impaired The plaintiffs therefore donaAd iAa1
The Union Rail- DAD Company may be compelled BY NE
Court to 90 on sni a It's duty IN S the q
pay their to, according TO the terms u the eonrsci
end that in case the Union Railroad Company re-
| fuses to go On and do it, duty In The premises,
some person may be appointed TO manage the
read. and proceed TO enforce theoollecsion os
TOE tolls il 'om tho other Companies This relief The
plaintiffs ask in the first Instance the only which
wiord them adequate protect against serious ultimate
loes But in the oouri will grant this relief, then
the plaintiffs ask fer foreclosure Of the mortgage,
and ihst tho four oomI ans be compelled - pay
| back quarter or any deficiency over and above
| the amount realized from the sale. And they ask
that during the pending II an action receiver may ba
tolls for the benefit Of the city. This action
pepced the 20 Of March, and thereafter the Reus
be due s% % " ~ Ss
Railroad Company; and ako put answer admisstnG
substantially nj he allegations Of the complaint and
instance, be gfantd. The answer OF the Union RaihoaA
Company does nos Gt will hardly BE- clamed) show any
pretence why the utmost relief asked by tho phntdS
should no, be granted and rs evidently designed only TO
nd the other three In establishing their defence
trail Railroad Company ana the Hudson River Railroad
Company are essentially similar. They with
rdest that The act OF e legislature 70 far Gs authorizes
the city TO loan It's credit, Unconstitutional voAahaa
the several agreements and the mortgage pur
| suance OF said act are illegal and VOID
Remark is usually deemed oishonorahlc among bs.
illness men 10 plead the statute Of Limitations usury.
|
beneot or How much more so FOR acosnrany standing In
,he position OF the New York Central seek 70 escape
from Us Just obligations the ground tina, the statute
ur which they have Induced innocent party, rely ing
en- the faith Ct its GUARANTEES issue bonds 70 large
amount, especially when that defence il pleaded
against party deriving direct and immediate bepeH
from the lrnds ior raising which becomes responsible
tie only advantage being tina, which was supposed
might result from the Increased business that would oe
brought ~ the city. The nex step may be 70 deny ths
validity of ~ Dan bonds which daily offered the
market ana readily purchased by iho.e desiring TO make
grswe a. these m mo-
coed 10 make Certain charges against the Rensselaer,
AID Saratoga Railroad Company for alleged yio-
hcons and ovRsicns OF the Contract by running
iss lumber OF the CITY y ought rly 10
dc, and thus escaping ho proportion Of the EXPENSES
ard misrepresentation IN procuring the adjustment o.
tolls TO be paid by the Union Railroad Company for tho
os s bridge They sho allcge that tne Union Railroad
Company, Tor the purp Sc u increasing the amount OF iS
re, enDes aud facilitating ia business, proposed permit
deroi on grounds cat Of the Uso RAlroa depot and %
ue the two eatIor tracks iDsdo o ai depot and passed
kensse.sr and Saratoga RAoad Company Tor Tho pur.
ptee ii promising ~ selfish motives afterwards pro-
cured en- injunction to be issued, fopidding such "
the depot aud grpGnds Adjoining
Remark " bsic,er force there might be In these ale
ssons In suit against The Rensselaer, aud Saratoga Rail
io@a eonl ~ compel them 70 hive ~ 70 the spirit OF
The CONTRACT cannot surely siord a,y just for
refusing 70 perform their Obligations party an
want Of good fsh /, alleged. Tney then
proceed TO charge, though without any cause,
a the city In league vita the Rensselaer, and Saratoga
iarad oomlany. They sdui, that tbey do Intent
10 Fay any more ~lk ia the negotiable proportion whcG
ta bereOoie beta necessary, by =. the action u
tho Hsnsseiaer and "a sioga Railroad Company, unloss
compelled 70 do They deny any oonfcdcrscy break
ny The contract but alege thai has been broken and
violated by The Iepseser and Railroad Company.
They deny that the city entitled = specific eror nance
Of The contract, and hai is only remedy tho mort
age and separate guara ties " the railroads. IRE
nsIk.-Ihs showx an evident intention foroe a salo OF
the road, REGARDLESS Of he Consequences city
They then again insist Thai the at Of the Legislature and
The subsequent mortgage arc ILLEGAL ana
sv1 Anu uat .e oeienaant are not liza ,Ie tbereon Ths
sua~cr OF the Troy and Boston Railroad Company n In
subance Tie those II The New York Central and
HUDSON River, with the exception 81 the defence, setng
up DE unconstiu,onahy OF The law and illegally Of The
cont lct5 The motion Tor receiver argued ON The
18th AID leth d April, Burl, g. Van Santvoort and
Wu Curtis Noyss appearing for The city, and Thomas
koyth Nicholas fiil, John Rcy po a. n Oliver and NJ.
1uGn-hend for the Ynkiona The moakon haa