The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-06-03
ing counsel were not at all agreed as to the
proper management Of the cause.

AN - =
ing counsel were not at all agreed as to the
proper management Of the cause.
He then commenced a review Of the his
tory of the company, and quoted literally
from the Acts of Assembly in relation to It
to show what was the interest of the State.
On the point made by Mr.. Jones, that the
trustees had another remedy-that specific
ally provided in the deed-Mr. McF Farland
started to give authorities sustaining his
view, but Judge Bond said it was not neces-
sary; the provision in the deed was cumu-
latiye. The Court would extend its arm
where proper case was shown.
THE STATES ABSENCE.
In reference to the absence of the State
from the suit, Mr.. Mcfarland asserted that
the defendant, of all in the world, had no
cause to complain. He would be very happy
to see the State come in aud be made q party
defendant. He, however, denied the neces-
sity Of making junior mortgage party
such q mertgagee was, to be sure, proper
but not necessary party. To sustain this
view he quoted multitude of authorities.
He asserted, also, that prior mortgage
was not necessary party, where it was not
intended to interfere with his estate. Ordi-
narily it is the junior mortgagee that has
first to claim protection and the enforcement
of his mortgage, and the junior mortgagee,
in protecting his interest, would necessarily
have to protect the interests OF the prior
mortgage. What they wanted here was to
subject their own estate; the estate conveyed
to them; none other.
.. TIGHT TIME COMING.
Doubtless it would be necessary for the
protection OF the interests of complainants
during these proceedings, said Mr.. Nc
Farland, to make the prior mortgages par
ties to this cause. On the 1st Of July there
would likely be default Of interest due to
the latter. Itwould hardly be possible for a
receiver within the limited time between
now and then to provide himself with the
means to meet this large sum Of interest.
Mr.. Mcfarland was going deeply into
the main question-whether it was case
for receiyer-when counsel for the COM
pany interposed and maintained that that
argument should be made after the demur-
rcr had been disposed of.
THE DEMURRER WITHDRAWN.
The Court seemed inclined to allow Mr.
Mcfarland to go on, on the ground that the
demurrer comprehended all the questions
that Mr.. Mcfarland was proceeding to dis
cusS.
Judge Robertson stoutly protested that
under the rules OF practice nothing but the
demurrer ought to be considered at that
time, and that the motion for the appoint
ment OF a receiver was not Immediately
before the Court.
Judge Bond told Mr.. Mcfarland to pro-
ceed.
Judge Robertson, for the company, then
begged leave to withdraw their demurrer
and to file their answer.
Judge Bond asked if the other side had
any objection to that course being pursued :
Mr.. Mcfarland let it be understood that
in his opinion that was not the way to do
business, but he did not absolutely object,
and Judge Bond said the demurrer could bc
withdrawn and the answer filed.
DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THE AFFIDAVITs.
Judge Shipman suggested that the afida-
Wits they had filed with the amended bill,
setting forth the financial condition of the
road, would now come under consideration.
Judge Robertson did not understand that
that was the agreement. He thought the
affidayts were not TO be used in the prclimi-
nary stages of the ease; ii they were to be
they would be compelled to insist upon
time to prepare counter affidavits, for though
the saying was that figures won't lie, it IS
notorious that an expert could take report
and from its figures show things that never
had any existence. Their showing from
the same material would be altogether dill
ferent from the other sides.
Mr.. Mcfarland protested against delay.
The company had had sixty days time,
which he thought amply sufficient for them
to prepare to answer the statements taken
from the company's records.
4 SHORT STOP.
Judge Robertson vigorously opposed this
proposition to 90 on. They had been forced
! to proceed with but short time for the eX-
animation OF the amended bill, ana were
now to be brought face to face with forty OF
fifty pages OF atdavits containing new mat
fer. CORRESPONDENCE, and financial state
mcnts that they had hardly had opportunity
to glance at SO far.
Judge Bond asked how much time was
wanted for the company to prepare its aili-
dayts.
Judge Robertson desired at least till Mon
day.
Mr.. Mcfarland objected to that delay,
contending that the matter in the atlidavlts
was perfectly familiar to General Mahone's
side.
Judge Hughes said the Court regretted
70 be compelled to abbrevate the time, but
Judge Bond was compelled to be in Raleigh
on Monday. -
A continuance till this morning at 10
O'Clock was allowed. 80,
Judge Robertson. after consulting VIII
General Malone, stated that the delay Was
hardly sufficient, but that they would MAKE
the best possible use OF 1t.
THE ANSWER TO THE BILL.
Major Stringiellow fled their answer to
the bill. 1t was a ponderous document,
partly printed and partly in MSS, and was
a comprehensive response to all the alie-
cations and imputations contained IN Tile
bill of complaint. r..
By permission Of the Court counscl lol
the trustees were permitted to take tne
answer of the file to examine it during the
afternoon and evening. The court was
then adjourned till 10 O'Clock this morning:
Hon. r. II. Daniel, Attorney General OF
the State, is in daily attendance upon the
court, watching developments and ready to
defend the States interests.
THE LECTURE THURSDAY NIGHT.-Rev.
Father Stenson's lecture Thursday night al
Cathedral Hall attracted large and appre-
ciative audience. The learned and scholarly
discourse of the reverend gentleman was
repIete with pathos and much humor, and
his accent gave q richness and beauty to his
speech that was pleasing in the extreme.
| His audience was perfectly enthused rs he