The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1876-09-30

Oeea Prom some Tune IN The year 1891.
II appears, therefore, that this money
was paid for services running through fre
years anterior to 1862, and it does not
appear that any part whatever was earned
in that year. The decree fixing and con-
6rming the rights of the second mortgage
bondholders was entered at the August
term in the year 1861, and the sale itself
took place as carly as March, 1862.
No GppreciaJle part, i! any, Of this
item can therefore be apporaoned 10 he
year 1862.
Ninth HeH.-"Noyember 7. Services
to first mortgage bondholders of st. Louis,
Alton and Tere Haute Railroad Com
pany, as per affidavit, $4,000"
This item was the original main stay Of
the 7iases's SANDER, aud is still clung to
with considerable tenacity. In support of
its theory on the subject, the Times has
appealed to the Answer before mentioned.
To this document we shall now refer, and
at page 81 VIC find the following state
ments:
That the defendant, Tilden, for a part of
his services aforesaid, also made charge Of
the like sum Of $4,000 on account Of profess
| sional services rendered TO the first mortgage
bondholders and the receivers, which was
paid to him by the said Azariah c. Flagg,
surviving receiver as aforesaid.
And these defendants deny that either Of
the two claims of the defendant last aforesaid
were for, or were ever stated by him as for
claims against the reorganization, or that it
-
last aforesaid that any claim Of the defendant
last aforesaid for $4,000 against tho reor.
ganization be allowed as in the said bill Of
complaint mentioned, (Fols. LAG, l47, I4s.
To ascertain the time of the rendition
Of the services on account Of which such
payment was made, the reader is referred
to the opposite page, at folio IA, where
we find it stated that Mr.. Tilden "tcas also
the counsel for said receiUers, and that he
also acted as the principal counsel for the
said first mortgage bond holders, in rela-
tion to the foreclosure proceedings here
inbefore mentioned, and other proceedings
connected Herewith, and that such ser
vices had commenced prior to the year
1859, and were rendered, from time to
time, during period of upwards Of three
years thereafter"
In other words, the services were rem
dered in 1858, 1859, 1860 and 1861.
No considerable part of these services be-
long to the year 1862. The foreclosure
proceedings in which they were rendered
had already reached decree in August,
1861.
am aware that most disingenuous
construction has been put by the Times
upon sentence from the answer which
have here quoted, viz, the words, sand
that such services had commenced prior
to the year 1859, and were rendered from
time to time, during period of upwards
of three years thereafter" The argument
Of the Times is that this sentence admits
the continuance Of these services during
the ,ohole Of the year 1862. Isubmit that
even if these words stood alone, any fair
mind would read them as meaning that
the services continued for upwards of three
years after they had commenced, which is
expressly stated to have been before the
year 1859. This is the true construction
Of the words. 1t is their meaning. 1t
accords with the facts.
But Of course, if the writer desired to
ascertain the meaning and intent of this
passage, and found it ambiguous, he would
look to the context and, indeed, to the
whole answer.
By referring to page II of this same
answer you will perceive that the foreclos-
ure suit in which these services were
rendered was terminated in a decree as
early as August 8, 1861 (folio G., } and
that the road was actually sold in the
month of March, 1862. So that there
must have been at least nine months Of
the year 1862 which could not have called
for these services, and as to the interval
between January and March, 1862, any
lawyer will understand that this could not
have called for much service, being the
time occupied by the running of the
advertisement Of sale, &c. Furthermore,
the payments which give rise to the
discussion were both made before the close
of the year 1862, and it is SO stated in the
answer.
IF l recollect rightly, the Times has on
former occasion referred to the date
of the agreement of first mortgage bond
holders, set forth in the answer april Is,
1861, as evidence that the services were
of short continuance. But this agreement
was but the final confirmation Of negotia-
tions which had been going on for three