Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1873-06-27
The Central Vermont Railroad.

and Vermont and Canada, Mr.. Underwood
opened for the petitioners. The present re-
ceivers not being company, but mere ON
GERS in chancery, had been compelled to I'M
prove the roads, by mourning debts instead
of increasing capital. A large majority OF
all interested now desire the capitaiizing Vi
this indebtedness, and the legislature has
provided the way. Whether to continue
the present receivers or substitute the Zen
trail Vermont is a question of discretion with
the court and the wishes of majority OF
those in interest ought to be influential. III
relief is not granted in this way the proper
ty must be sold, of course at q sacrifice.
Mr.. Stafford, in behalf of the Yer
mont and Canada and such OF the
bondholders as he represented, said this
proceeding was without precedent. A cor
poration ought not to be a receiver because
it is practically beyond the control OF the
court 1t is an artificial person. Again,
the Central Vermont is interested in the de-
probation of the Vermont Central securi-
ties. This manifestly disqualifes it. Pla-
| cling them in possession gives them an ad-
vantage which they can use. In support OF
this proposition Mr.. Stafford cited an Eng
| lish authority where n receiver was remoy-
ed, against the protest OF large majority
| of those in interest, not because ne mad
taken advantage, but because he could do
so. The Central Vermont, by their charter
| can build and run all the other roads they
choose, and thus injure their trust estate
| Unless the 5th section of the charter con-
fers authority the court cannot appoint this
| corporation as receivers. The object OF the
act was to take these roads out of chancery
and not more hopelessly continue them IN
| it. There has been no opportunity since
the closing of the books for the bOndholders
to come in and exchange their bonds for
stock. 1t is not contended but that a sutf-
Gent amount of stock has been subscribed to
retire majority of the first mortgage bonds.
If the charter is unconstitutional, the com
pany can already take possession, and run
the road rs company, not a. receivers.
The legislature never would have thought
of passing an act whereby this company
should perpetually operate the road IN
chancery. IL conclusion, Mr.. Stafford dis
cussed the illegality of the first step in the
organization of the company, giving and
simplifying the reasons urged in the morn
ing in regard to the introduction of Mr..
Barlow's testimony.
Mr.. Hard in behalfof the Vt. and Canada
said that they were only seeking to recover
their rent and not to inJure the roads. lie
denied that large majority of the security
holders are in favor of granting the prayer
of the petition That the bondholders are
not numerously represented here Is more an
evidence of their WEAKNESS and discourage
ment than Of their approval or disapproval.
The old VT. Central, owned by Gov. Smith,
is here, to be sure, but nobody pretends that
it is of any account. The Rutland road
puts in an appearance, but what business l.
it to them? Mr. Stafford and himself repre-
sented all the substantial parties to the
case. On the other side were the receivers
officers of the court, now claiming the
right to dictate. Who else appears The
Central Vermont mere artificial beng
and an utter stranger TO the case, having
no more right to interfere than the y. J.
Central 1t is the merest fetus of a com
pany, not yet properly organized; the 9TH
section of the charter gave the court power
to appoint them only temporarily, and no
power whatever since a sufficient amount OF
stock has been subscribed TO retire MAORI
ty of the lst mortgage bonds. There can
be no receivers appointed for any OF this
property save what Is in litigation. not for
the leased lines and the Montreal and Vt.
Junction, and moreover. receivers cannot
themselves take an active and prominent
part in the conduct of the cause. \
stranger to n cause will not be heard, and
especially on an application to be appoint
ed. This would make the court Il sort of
President Grant, 10 dispense patronage. |
and he didn't know but the rules of the
civil service ought to be introduced. In |
England it has been held that it Is not |
the business of the courts to run railroads, |
canals or mines. The legislature provided |
for this receivership only a a mere inter |
regnum during the making of transfers. |
Besides, an interested party cannot be a
receiver. The Vt. Il Canada do not see any
assurances of such success by the new
company a. to make their rent more sure,
and there will be new set of accounts,
more complication and deeper darkness.
The present receivers are men of reputed
wealth. Substitute a corporation and You
lose their personal liza bility and gain no adj
vantage whatever.
Mr.. Phelps replied that the beg in
ming and the end of this is the proposition
to substitute one set of receivers for
another. The property is covered by many
successive liens and possibly conflicting
claims and it must be extricated in some
way. If 1t were private concern it could
De sold, wound up and divided but it is
public. must continue to be operated. One
II three courses must be taken either to
etuse this motion and leave the trustees to
20 on; or wind up and liquidate or put
n this new company chartered for the pur-
lose. The trustees are not to be turned
'ut because any objection exists to item
Everybody has confidence in them-but be- {
ause they are unable to go on alone: Won
an compel them to 90 on, they can't.
Von t remain. The Vermont and Canada '
re substantially the only party opposing a
his, and they are entitled to be heard only a
0 the extent of their interest. Where are v
he parties to this cause? The public i one c
nd they have been heard by way of grant J
1g the charter. They have nominated the 3
'entral Vermont to this court for appoint n
ient as receivers, and given the court the h
over to appoint. Where are the other o
artles? Not living man is here save two Il
ondholders represented by Mr.. Stafford of g
he whole army of miscellaneous creditors,
OF one Is here TO oppose this petition. The [
-ustees and the committee of the bond a
olders (PinkertOn and Drury) are here c,
skiing for it. Il
Mr. Brooks wants his rent. but there i 9
0 reason to suppose he will not get it from n
substantial corporation As soon as from 7 u
le>e embarrassed trustees, and sooner than
sale OF the property. II this corpora '
on Is not to be put in. who i? Whom do &c
icy want? They do not tell Us. Some g
'dy must be placed in the shoes of these NJ
ceIvtrs. 1t Is the Central Vermont or ca
body, that must take this property and OF
~ these debts. 1t Is objected that a cor eS
'ratlOn cannot be receivers, but under al
odern practice they can, and in thi, IN
untry there l. no objection to it. where In
c charter authorizes II. The Vermont and III
lnada were themselves the first receiver,
tins property ever appointed, and they 81
I'd 1t as corporate receivers nearly two Tn
airs. to
Mr.. SaliOrd says You can't appoint them co
cause they can depreciate the securities. to
m the same rule apply TO every other re- mi
Iver II they We're of the Fisk and do
'uld stamp there might he danger but
ey are men eminent for their honor. oil
d besides, the court can remove them at on
H. ha
: for the charter, it does not limit the time bu
the receivership a. contended it provide, TN
II when stock shall have been subscribed IN
hcIent to retire the first mortgage bonds ma
ltoresaid, which refers to the opening of ma
lks by the directors, and not by the COM pr;
Ssloners. Their objection that sufficient ma
n has been subscribed 50 that the Com
ny should take the road as company, if IN
all, has no weight therefore, for the d. Co
tors have not opened their books. A. ma
the responsibility of the Central Yer COZ
mt, the stockholders have paid in but five Bu
cent. to be sure. bat they are able To POI
the balance and expect to pay it they the
pose to 90 on and pay off this floating Ce
It and have already commenced. The tbs
A that corporation is not amenabIe to to
process OF the court is absurd The OBJ to
OF the charter was to get this property
OF the court of chancery. If this peti the
! fails, that fails, and there is no relief Aft
lr. Brooks said he felt called upon to de IKE
| himself against the imputation that for
Vermont and Canada are offering fac cei
Is opposition. The charter, a. they un-
stood it, was procured to end the re- for
ership. When the books for this Com mil
y were opened he came up. with Others. 1
ubScribe and pay in bonds, supposinr poy
bondholders were to be the only sub Lor
bers ; was surprised to find thot tins MOI
not expected and In find otbars bar, . nra