Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-01-07

sA0 -eShSat oAa piSbabiy prevail
ed upon grounds of public interest and
OF private to their trust, derived, no
from gross earnings, not from net in
come, but from that joint control anC
dominion which is to make somebody q
railway king, and is to make the farm
er and the merchant and the shipper t.
pay that tribute which he pleased to i'm
pass, and not allow that competition
In transportation of which the farmer
merchant and shipper as in other trans
actions of life may avail himself
Isn't il rather late, sir. and isn't there
an audacity which We may almost admire
in counsel in having presented such 8
CONTRACT TO you, only upon specisl
grounds which were committed to youl
consideration, to 1urn around few
years afterwards, when, as the rumors
In the air say, there had arisen u Ger
tam unpleasantness among people who
had before been friends, and say th al
they had been led into this contract upon
the motive or for the purpose of getting
a particular income out of a particular
property, which had been misrepresent-
ed to them, and therefore they were en-
titled BOW to have il made up. Why,
sir, If Corporations possessed the attrib-
utes, which are suppo:ed to belong to
most Individuals, of having some soul,
and some conscience and some sense of
shame, | am not sure but this mystical
and mythical thing, the Central Yer
mont corporation, would feel disposed
somewhat to blush at such an atti
tude.
And where do We stand then, upon
such state of things? Your order thus
made is either void or il is valid. and no
gentleman here today processes TO claim
that that order is void.
Mr. UnderwOOd-The Vermont i
Canada claim it void. and some of the
bondholders claim il void-these goats
that came in here and filed their an
swers
Mr.. Edmunds-Idon't understand that
they claim il TO be void.
Mr.. Underwood 1t is of no corse-
quence. | beg your pardon for inter
ruptlng.
Mr. imunds-l am very glad to be in
teTrupted when my friends think make
any statement that is rot vouche1
by the record. My friend is probably
correct when he says that if they do say
II is void It IL of no consequence | am
sure that Mr.. Willard did not say either
that ii was void or he thought il was
void. he said he was instructed by his
clients to ask your honor that this road
should be given up or take some meas
ures 10 secure whatever msy be possible
by way Of indemnificatiQn.
| will HOt take any time here To argue
that this order of yours is valid | shall
assume II. Now. sir, assuming it to be
valid, Whist is i;2 Ii is Judicial order,
not personal order. Il is the command
OF citizen of ST. Adams, but il is the
command Of the law in its most solemn
form. and these persons to whom the
command comes are expected to obey it.
in every other county but this, and |
trust in few days ii will be accepted in
this to be- the law when it comes in the
form OF Judicial order.
Now, what do they say in respect of
these matters that are set forth in the
petition and 70 which | have adverted?
Do they say that any one of these ale
cations is u-true They do not. They
admit that the contract was made in
the manner thai the petition set forth.
They admit that these orders were given
in the manner that this petition sets
forth. ana they are stated in the petition
10 have been In and part of the neCo-
tiaii1n, which IL not denied in the au-
sWer, and to have been a part OF the
security contemplated aud a most essen
tisl and important protection Of the in
terest which the directors of the Rutland
railroad company, themselves simply
trustees for the property Of other PEG
pie, were ends8yoring 10 obtain for the
security of their constituents.
They admit that said J Gregory
Smith As President of the Central Yer
mont RAILROAD company, has ordered said
c ,mpsuies not to pay any more money
10 the said petitioner by the authority OF
said orders. r. he was authorized to do
aud las the only practical mode Of bring
ing about an equitable adjustment Of the
rent, as prudence and safety required
VIII your Honor, lest | should forget il.
although il Is little out OF place, please
10 note this in the answer: That Gov
ernor Smith, as president of the Central
Vermont Railroad Company, revoked
these orders ana commanded the com
panies not 10 pay upon them. And
why Because before June :, 1873. he
had discovered that there had been
fraudulent misrepresentation in the mat
Ter 10 respect If which he relied in En-
.ering 10 this contract By no means.
As the only practical mode of bringing
about sn eQutsble adjustment Of rents,
inr as prudence aud safety required
What equitable adjustment OF rents
Why, It appears somewhere in the an
iwers, or IN the case, | believe; yes il
appears in the consolidation agreement. I
that the defendants hsi com /
planned To the Rutland Railroad Com I
)any's officers that these rem were too /
ligh; that they had found Fl m the /
hardness OF the times and disappointed /
that all of the benefit which /
Jas expected from this arrangement did .
lnt seem 10 be realized; and, therefore.
hat they were giving more than at the .
present time they could afford 70 do.
nd asking for q reduction OF the rent;
nd, thereupOn. in this consoii alton
greement in which al the parties. or
of the properties. the iii
ccioTs OF the two concerns. the man
gers, all OF these same people be, ween
whom il IS now said there had been this
fraudulent misrepresentation snd corrupt
ractice, come together ard agree that
hey viii enter upon Il new scheme.
which was TO consolidate into ore cor
,OratiOu the three rnads-the Canada.
be Central and the Rutland-ihe Cantda
D be then subject to contingency, bat
be- other two were To be married, and
we're 10 he one fof better or for worse.
md in The meantime, till that shoald
G accomplished, the Rutland railroad
luuld reduce lis rent by the sum of
100. 900 per year. But that reduction.
5 a further part OF that consolidation.
green Mt, was not to be effectual
j the stockholders Of the Rutland and
le stockholders of the Central should
ssent. and the Judicial approval of