Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-11-28

AZ ola Chaneerz case Deelded.

In the Chancery Court yesterday in the
case of Frank Hardeman, Trustee, vs.. n ASH
vile and Decatur Railroad Company, Cham
cellor East rendered decree in substance
as follows: The Court Is Of opinion, upon
a review of the whole case, and doth so de-
cree that those of the parties who accepted,
but brought notice home to the trustee or
his solicitors that he or she did not desire
the institution Of the suit, shall not be
charged, but in all cases where the parties
were reticent or ambiguous, and dld not
take positive and active means to notify
the parties managing the suit OF bis or her
objection, they will be charged, and the
Clerk and Master be required to ascertain
and report how these facts are. Those
who did not desire the institution OF the
suit will not be charged with any portion OF
the compensation to, and expenses OF the
trustee and Of his counsel fees.
The history of the case is this: On the
first day of April, 1860, the Tennessee and
Alabama Railroad Company, having been
empowered to do so, made its coupon bonds
to the amounted 1906, 200, due at 10 years,
payable at the bank Of the Manhattan Co.,
N. Y, with 10 per cent. interest per an
mum, and in order to secure the payment
of the same on that day, conveyed to John
S. Clay brooke in trust, and to his sue
cessors. the railroad commencing at Nash
vide and terminating at Mt. Pleasant, To-
gether with the superstructure, depots,
buildings, franchises, etc, including the en-
tire property, also the income OF the road,
after paying the necessary expenses, inter-
est ami sinking fund on the States debt
against the same, etc. The conveyance
was upon the following trusts: that, should
the company fail to pay the interest or
principal when either became due,
upon go days default, upon the
request of the holders OF such
bonds, said Claybrooke or bis successors In
said trust may enter and take possession OF
any part or all Of said premises, and as the
agent of the company employ the same and
apply the proceeds after paying prior claims
to the payments of the bonds, or the trus-
tee could sell the whole or any part OF the
promises at public sale upon certain specl-
fed terms, and execute deeds thereto,
vesting the purchaser with good title to the
same as against the company. These bonds
were put into the market and $2Oo,OOO
thereof sold. Subsequently Clsybrooke
resigned his position as trustee and FRANK
Hardeman was appointed in his stead.
After the maturity of the bonds Hardeman
as trustee filed bis bill in the Chancery Court
to forclose the mortgage, and upon TINS
bill a motion was made for receiver,
which was heard and refused, mainly upon
the ground that the United States mao
fled bill previously against the Company
to foreclose lien or mortgage IN It's favor
in the Federal Circuit CsNrt, and therein
had also prayed for receiver. The trustee
afterwards MED his bill in the Federal
Court, and in that case renewed bis mo-
ton for a receiver, but the same was never
heard. Pending the litigation, the whole
matter was compromised, and the same
accepted by all parties. Previous to and
pending the litigation certain Of the bond
holders affected to OF pose the suit, while
many others demanded its prosecution,
and others, it is said, were for or against
the suit, depending upon circumstances.
Hence the decree as rendered. There are
fees and costs amounting to very consid-
cradle sum to be settled, as in all big Law
suits, and that is ''what's the matter with
Hannah