The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1867-12-17

- mincst busuess men Il that city
ard ooutrrsed u8ih them Ia relation -
tie interruption - railroad cammAni
cations which has existed siuee Janu
ary last Tie Troy gentlemen intlma
TED Their belief that = settlement q TIE
difficulties boiaoen Mr. PARK aud The
Troy a Boston Company, might he q.
ioeiei b. means d reference.
Before VI CLARK and Mr 0ris left
they were called upon by Daniel Rob
iuson and M Hearit another director
Of The Troy & Boston Company, and
the trouhle between that Company and
81 P4rG became the ahiect 81 con-
yersaiion Daring the interview, Mr..
Robinson suggested that settlement
q al matters ia dispute might be
brought about II Mr. Park would agree
70 a reference.
On their way home, Messrs. Clark
and oryis saw Mr Park, and told him
tire conversation they had had with
Mr. Robinson. A day or two after
they received the following letter,
Orrfcs - rur BrxvNorox 4 RurtAsp
RAILROAD CoNrANH
SoAru REsnIaGroN, VI, Dec. 5th, 1897.
Mrssns A. q. CLAIM & H. II. OHNis, .
Manshes:sr VI,
GrSrLrMgSi
As YOU have informed me that you
have interested yourselves to get con
nection Of tie Railroads at the State
line, and believe il can be done II any
agreement can be made for a settle
ment Of the suit now pending
+ and other matters in difference, and
I that perhaps tho controversies may be
settled by arbitration, Il make the fol-
lowing proposition:
LIST. We viii agree to refer all mat
tiers in dispute (includiug terms ofcon-
nection Of the two roads to three dis
interested men TO be appointed by the
court before which the action is pen
ding, or the Supreme Conrt, as the
Troy 4 Boston Co choose. Or
I'd. We will agree to the same ref
ference, each party TO select one of the
referees, and il we cannot agree on the
third one, he shall be appointed by the
court before which the action is pend.
ing. or the Supreme Court, as the Troy
\ d Boston Co. choose. Or
+ 81. We viii make the same refer.
enco to the judges Of the Supreme
Court, excepting Judge Prout, who is
attorney for the Troy q Boston
Company in this litigation; or if hc
will consent to act as referee, we vii
include him.
BY the terms OF the reference, the
referees shall be required to decide ac
cording to law, or according to equity
rs the Troy & Boston Co. choose.
Satisfactory bonds to be given b.
each party to perform the award Of thu
referees; and the property attached t
; be released from the attachment
II will be worse than useless to ne
! gotiate about who the referees shall be
until we have agreed 10 refer, and agree,
upon mode If appointing, in case W
cannot agree. If wo should undertak
to appoint them all ourselves, and fai
toagree, it would only lead TO recrimi
nation and increase the difficulties of
final arrangement
The litigation is in this State, an,
must ultimately go before the Suprem
Court We are willing TO refer to tn
Judges Of the same court, or allow ther
to select the referees il we cannot agree
/ have no doubt arrangements wi
be made to secure an early trial of th
case before our court, if no other dispo
sition is made of it.
/ have tried for the past nine month
Z to secure connection Of the roads, ant
: have repeatedly offered to refer, but a
4. offers have been rejected lido notleav
: the propositions open beyond reason
able time, and 1t must lie distinctly IN
derstood that il we fail to agree, til
; negotiations are not TO be relied upo
n as cause for delay in the trial Of til
j cases III court
1ou are at liberty to make such us
Of this letter as yon see fit, and ] wi
hold myself bound by the proposition
/, made, If accepted within reasonabl
time
= / sincerely wish you success in you
)! undertaking
4 Very truly yours,
T. w. PARK.
a With this letter they returned to Tro.
t and again saw Mr. Robinson and NJ
Heartt, Mr., Robinson then said the
Z could agree 70 no reference which il
Guided The terms of connection, CLAIM
b iag that they were bound by contrac
i with the Rensselaer, & Saratoga Raj
>. 81 fN,..-.a.,.. ., - .. $4,000. III %,