, 1875-07-19
Tho Great Wnbnsll Cuna1 CnsC
Before Judges Davis and
DruInmOntl.
They Decide that the Canal Must Be
Sold to Satisfy Bondholders.
A Decision That Cigars Gould he Copy
rlghted Under The Old Law.
A suitor Wants to Know Why Steam Dunn
mics Are Run Through Lake View.

CHICAGO.
THE wABAslt / EhIE CANAL.
A case involving . Largo amount, aud Of special
interest to roHdonta Of Ihdiana was on trial
| Saturday before Judges Drummoud and David
Davis.
This 1aH Ahit commenced by J. X. Gapon, a
bondto1dor In tho Wabash L Rfso Canal, In bohnf
OF hinsolf and al othor bondholderB Ii, the ca.
nal, against tho Irusteoa Of tsle canal, Tor tile
| purpose OF forecloaiug tho ttu8t.deed to The
Trustees.
Prior to 1877 the State Of Indiana had become
very largely involved In dobs Oh variousacco
tue principal boiug to raso money to
construct canal from tho sasotn State
limo to Evanev1Ilo, = distance of oYcr
$50 miles. From 1871 10 1s47 tho State xas ltn-
aole even 10 pay it's debt, aud 1t the last named
dato boinR Involved to tho amount Of about
&1l,0oO,0go, with interest for stx yoara at por
cout. An adjustment was ma1o And an act
| passed by which one-hslf Of tho principal aud
lntoreat wna to be charged OIL tho toia and
revenues of tle Wabash l. Erin Canal and .bs
other half charged to tie Treasurer Of tho State.
and paid bY taxation. This amouut charged to
tho canal was about $1,000, 900. including in
terese~ The Sta1o for It's half iasuod
bonds bearing + per cont interest or
'''~ Ps'eafAt aou ~ Pel SoAt Va wv
accrued intcteat, Which layo eiuco all bcen paid
| up. At that time tho canal was In prosperous
aud paying condition, although hot completed
hut Elie demand for rapid transportation, INTRO
duccd giant foo iuto the arena. and TO BIow-
moving 6orsc waa neglected for tho swift aud
tIra!sBs iron-stsed. 1talltoads weso lald ont all
ovor Tie State aud the canal revenues decreased
| III proportion, go TINT neithor tho principal NOR
interest of this debt has bccn pHd and ths pros
poets grow worso e1ory year, Ii they are not nuu
wholly hopeless.
At tho time this dob. Was put on tho canal
three Trustees were appointed and created
coiposatson. To them was conveyed tho canal,
It's lnuds, revenues, and franchises, su trust to
pay this dete. And they not having been allie
10 pnv it tie aforementioned srit Nss begun.
The aTglmen. occupied tlls greater portion OF
saturday N }s1llug. tho principal point belug as
TO tho 1ariedcton Of q court Of equity In tho
case to forccose tho trustdeod. Tho defendants
claimed that contingency had occurred not
provided Tor by this eel and TINT tie BsoeSholl.
IRA were helnleHH
Judge Drutnmond in his docieion discussed
tho points. Berlatem and Il is not uocoaAary 10
rep0At thon. Tho fo''oHing Is tho decision in
full. Il was concurred in bT Judge DAVIS:
lu t tina case tho facts seem to be that tho Con-
orai Government made g1aut to tho State of
Indiana OF q quantity OF land for tho purpose OF
enabling tho State TO CAUSE = oanal to 10 con-
btructed. The btato accepted the trust, and
large anionnt Of capital ~aa advanced to tho
btate for tho purpose Of constructing tho canal
10 serurD tho part,aa who advanced money the
State g,auted to Trustees lilo latd wt,icL naI
locn gwen to 1t for tho construction OF tho ca
1lal. 1t turns out how, the canal being cou-
nsfuesed ana the tolls NOS paying auy portion Of
tho intoreat that IL due On tho debt, thas
soue Of the crcdttora dcslro that tho
property r., ,.,n which has bsen given to
u msae ass.te S hs 'f for Ss hs'e sI
paying tue whole or part Of the dcSt. It is a.
legged in the b,ll aud admitted by tho anaxor,,
tlat tue debt c.. never bo pAtd by tho tolls Of
tue canal. or even thointerost. or any potion Of
IT, That, In fact az It ia ,ron, and has boen Tor
many yenrs, that tho tolls are not enough to
heep tho canal In repair, aud that 1t IL going to
decay, aud within very short smo U!ff ceaso to
secure 1t from the condition 10 Which it now iB.
Ihan this question ar!aca undor the facts Of
Of the cafe: whether thls property, coneed,ue
taat i may have some value can be msdc avail
= portion OF thelr dobt. Thoro arc two objoc.
tlons taken on tho part OF tho Trustees, who axo
made defendants to this bill first, tlat court
OF equity has no power to cause this property to
10 ao!d tor tho purpose Of ca'rsins out tho OBJ
10 done, it csunos he without the
ceedlngs. As to tho first objection,
this T. like ~ otdinxry case whore property is
tlansforrod for tue purpose Of securing debt.
The fact that sovereign State IL lntrustol a. \
party cauHot deprive tho creditors who ara en-
tstle1t psynaeut OF thclr debt OF the benettt OF
tho fund which hrs bccn given to effect tuat pus-
poso. Tho object In transferring the property
10 tho Trusted was to secure thoso parties who |
might ndyance money from timo to time 10 cor
st1uct tho canal, and to say becauas the State s
party to tho contract that they aro to he do |
rrised Of the benedss Of tEss fnnd, would be an \
act, ~ It se0ns to ule, Of Injustice which would !
DO entirely Inconsistent With tho dut7 which tho |
State o"oa to tho parties who advanced tho |
nionsy On ths faith Of the contrzct. Theo ~ to |
the State being = party to tho ptoceeding, the |
only iptcrcst which tic Htato has IL : 1cs!1uaty
Interest," II was provided by tbs act Of 1915 and |
laa7 that Whenever tho creditors waro paid tho
amount they hhvo advanced that tho canal
should Eevort to tue state. tho object being that
the State should rotain what It WIS supposed
VIVA or would be \ valuable property. Ihis
turned out TO DO llfusory, aud the interest never
will DO paid tho canal noyor will DO kept In TO-
pair II it nuat proces ~ IL hss done for the last
few yesrs. Thls boing 10, ths rsvarsionary in
toreSt which the State las turns out, in pohlt Of
fact, eonfesseai! 70 be OF no valuo wflatevcr.
and, in addition TO- that tha State
any Interest in tho ploperty--has in It's fnnda.
me1Ifhl LAW declared that it has ceased to have
auy iuterees. or to bo Htsponsibls .foE any debt
which has beon incurred.
What object il there in making t6e bsate party,
even II It eau 10 made pa.tYf What would ba |
tho object Of making ~ individual . party who
had ouly = roTorstonary interest III the property,
aud eho had declared thns that Inherent Ind
ecased, and declined to have any thing 10 do
With the p.opestY7 There would be no toes in
making him party to tho proceeding,
nelshor would thoEs be any III making tho
Ststa party to such bill ~ this. Ths I'LL
proceeds on tho theory that tho State has aba,,-
doned at right, and that it Ia not liable Ia aaY
form to tue creditors Of the canal. And this
option has bean ekarciaed aud that all iutarost
ii the property hzs coAsed on the part OF tLo
State.
That being 10 - tho State cAuuot sny way ID
tefSepe aud clam Any lutoreat neither cka tho
Trustees object that the State must be matio
party
This disposes OF Ill tho objections thst have
been raised. We think tha, thess ought tu ts a
dccrec Opposing Of tho property and Vtnding
up this controversy and making the property
available for The bapshs OF the exstltors VITO
have advanced money on tho faith OF tho
seourity which has bean solemnty g,yen BY the
State, and No really do net sss, IL ws de4ly this
tolles. what Poss,bia .esourcs thero will 10 for
tho creditors. The thing il Roipg an from bad