The New York herald., 1871-02-26
EANKRuPTCY.
The Boston, Hartford nnd Erie Railroad

Company.
In the United Circuit Court yesterday before Judge
Woodruff the of the Boston, Hartford and Eric Rail-
road Company up again for discussion Petitions In
bankruptcy have been filed against the company in Massn
chuss and New York. these proceedings still pend
ing branch of the being before Judge Bachord
the United States District Court Some weeks
the company obtained of the proceedings before
Judge Blachford, untl a motion could be argued before
Judge Woodruff in Circuit Court whether
ton should not issue restraining the petitioners the Adams
Express Company and Mr. Alien from taking further steps
In The
Yesterday, when the called, Mr.. T. A. Lane,
behalf OF the railroad company stated to the Court that he
was left alone without senior counsel and he wished to
have the argued by the hest counsel that could be found
In the country he wished further postponemen until next
Saturday such other time would suit the convenience
of the Court lie did how that could harm TO
the petitioners II the postponement granted pos
sble that rronse might effected The company
bad desired the of Judge Curtis
the motion, but owing to his relations to the parties be could
not act for either but Judge Thurman, who TO take
his place would be in town tomorrow Seth Adams credi
tor wanted to IN and raise the question whether Judge
Batchford had any Jurisdiction, having been
once oanknpt IA Massae".ss's @ nay
not pind the entire corporation.
Mr. O. Seward Gu the part OF the Adams Express Company.
Judge Woodruff said came four weeks ago
to postpone again After judge Cards had disclosed lis
Mr. Lane VIII your ionor give until Monday?
Judge WooiruH-Monday wii commence regular term
OF the court and cannot interrupt win noons OF this
KIND Tam. .,.r on.n,,, consn,,.,,on x,,, ,onn.o,
saidThea your Honor We withdraw the oi and petition
ire Court suggested ,ha. an order to that eject might be
subsequently the following order was enierei:-
Boston, Hartford and Ere Railroad VS.. James Alden
The order 10 show cause upon the Oil ana petoe herein
why Injunction should not be granted coming on to be
heard and A. Lane OF counsel for c)npanens and petit
petition, is ordered ,ha, the be
withdrawn and dismissed, with costs 70 the Defendant
THE CASE IN THE UNITED STATES DistHtor oooIr.
STe Ss s M Ss ls s. ,rs o be-
fore Judge Bachod The tile of the suit before the Juige
Adams Express Company vs. The Boston, Hartford mud
Erie Kalroai Company-Ths part OF
nd adiaaed Ssnkrups in The soathern district Of New
York There was similar petition on behalf Of NJ james
Seth ADAMS who had hed petition in the District of Mas
s district ass Se Se railroad AM company Mr.
ton to the extent Of saying that There ouh not 70 be
State of New pending the proceedings n Massachu-
ment Of asssnees IN three staies-Conneccat New York
and Massa"hnsctsor the management Of the estate OF
Mr. joseph H caoae sppeared as eounse FOR r Mr. Seth
OF the position taken BY his client lie eon,eaded that there
must at least be an Adjudication In bankruptcy IN hsssa
ad.udcaton against them in this district M he based
LIS on s,c I.c. ma. .e os 30, r. n
adudicated bankrupt In each Of three States there
appointed look after the interests OF the creditors IN those
Mr.. Clarence Seward. with whom Mr.. Costa, OPP
posed tho motion of Mr. Choate lie SAID the petitioners
claimed that they had right wherever they found corpc
ration Incorporated under the laws OF State present
petition against in bankruptcy grounds. The
boston, Hartford and Erie Railroad Company incogpo
rated under laws OF the STATE oil New YORK; and that fact
dr MED the defendants He called the attention of
the Court the General Raroad act 1850 applicable TO
this The defendants stated that they had formed them
selves into railroad under the saAie Jaw Oh the
sss Of seS % sS % and M @ hes was sef ~ S o @ s es &
elect OF that place the The operation
the statutes OF New York. This right % exist ~
corporation franchise the foundation OF Their legal
IL required enabling act OF the Legislature to
part with their corporate capacity, and under
the Boston and Hartford Extension Company sold ts fran
onse to the Boston, Hartford ana Erie Railroad Com
pany, and the corporation with ITS aarne
therefore corporation existing unoer he Law OF the state
Of New York ihe petitioners alleged IN their petition that
IL intended the Mr. Seth AdaLs
with the bankruptcy proceedings in Massach nses
stated by Mr. that donic,e OF this corpora
ton either IA Connecticut Massachusetts but The
cson OF the supreme OF the State OF New York
that cooperation legal entity but citizen, and If
II had donicile at all Connecticut, where it
rst Incorporated The State of New YORK could not give
foreign CORPORATION legal existence here unless had
He admitted that the railroad company
corporation, had legal existence separate States
under the nae but the road operated IN the
New York. under its charter pdepen
poration lie therefore caimed that the petitioners
properly before the court and thai the court had full ur1s
uction the
appeared behalf OF Mr. Alden, another
ere itor OF the railroad company claiming tha. the latter
corporation the law Of the State OF New York,
having property therein and that twas, therefore, within
available the henent OF the creditors the rail-
company. Why should the petitioner be enabled
nc could nd property available for the
mcnt of the creditors claims?
Counsel behalf of the Boston, Hartford aud Erie Rail-
road Company ntimated tina: brief containing his pons
would be put IN.
Adams after which the Judge took the papers and
tbs iectson.