Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1873-08-08

teority as to resist the bias of selfish and
conflicting interest. Most gladly would we
believe that one of them was and Is, and as
for the others we will leave them to the ap-
nroval or censure of those whom we believe
thew have betrayed and to the tender mer-
c;es of those journalists of Massachusetts,
who find the wrong all here in Vermont.
But since the security-holders opened
their eyes and portion of them appeared
before Chancellor Royce and tried to show
cause why the Managers should be re-
moved, we do not find for him the same de-
fence which was to our mind conclusive up
to that time. He heard them patiently Tor
a time, not excluding even the mathematl-
cal intricacies of freight car service on TINS
and other roads, but when testimony was
offered to prove that the Receivers had en-
jOyed private benefit from contract i9r
supplies, he Immediately excluded 1t, WITH
out even waiting for argument, and on the
ground that it involved an accounting ana
he was not going to sit there to take an ae-
count, which was the proper business on
master. We do not know but 1t dld IN
volve an accounting, but there are many
good LAWYERS, wholly disinterested. VINO
think it did not The question was-and
the only one-had there been fraud! ii
there had, the removal Of the trustees was
sought and then an accounting before a
master would have followed as matter OF
course. If there had not, then they would
have been indicated and no accounting
necessary save in the way prescribed by the
decree under which they held ONCE. but
even this they had neglected more tnan
twelve times. covering the whole perlo1 Oh
operations disastrous to the trust, ana py
the complainants being turned out oil court
~, a MONT involving. in the judgment OF
he chancellor. n fulfilment of this duty,
the Receivers enoyed an advantage IRON
their own wrong-a result which the law
declares intolerable to justice and not
lermissible in Court. That same testi-
monv has since been adduced before another
tribunal and no disinterested person doubts
but that if it had been received in court 1t
would have compelled the removal sought.
II Is said, in defence of Judge Royee's rul-
ing. that Judge Redfeld fully concurred
with him. So he did, but not until Judge
Royce had given his opinion. lie was
present not as a trler but merely
as an adviser. After the testimony
was offered he was not consult
ed. The opinion was given lmmedl-
ately, and aiterward, in reply to the aston
ished counsel, he sustained Judge Royce.
III MOulu ldNt UGH AA7NbNl 49,
he had no power to override. Newlll, how
ever. do both Judges the honor to believe
that while they undoubtedly desired TO avoid
an irksome task, choosing rather to let sub
sequent events or future litigation OF less
| personal character dispose Of the problem
presented, yet both were wholly free from
every influence which could be distorted
! into a charge of judicial corruption.
Some decisions have been made since then
which seem to us hardly less remarkable,
but we will not take space to discuss them
at this time. But before passing 10 other
considerations we desire to say word in
indication of the Supreme Court. The
charge has been freely but We think thought
lessly made in neighborhoOds where az
grieyed security holders reside, that this
court is utterly subservient to 1.-THE Ring.
4 charge more without foundation has not
been made. No case involving the title,
control or operation of these roads has been
before the Supreme Court for years, and
when they did have occasion to consider
these questions their decisions were favor
able to those who owned the property, as
we doubt not they will be again. Before
any parties interested let themselves down
TO the acceptance or repetition OF such IN
discriminate scandal against an able and we
believe impartial tribunal, they will do well
TO make case before that court and await
| its Judgment We do not believe that any
of the parties litigant have ever uttered a
word of such premature criticism or breath
ed a breath of suspicion, and yet in the
wide spread ignorance Of the nature and
/ duties of the different courts and of their
relations to the management of railroads
which has been " in court" it i not diff
fcult to understand how such indefinite
| ccnSure might arise. Our court Is com
posed of able men. whose decisions have
| always been authority at home and CON-
manded respect abroad.