The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1876-09-23

1
between Governor Tilden's return Of in.
come in 1862, and certain allegations
contained in an Answer in Equity, filed
by the defendants, of whom Mr.. Tilden
Is one of four in suit brought by the st.
Louis, Alton and Terre Haute Railroad
Company.
If you will turn to page 81, folio l45,
you will find these words:
That for such services the defendant,
Tiiden, made charge of $4,000 against
said second mortgage bondholders, and
the said charge was paid by or on behalf
OF said second mortgage bondholders, on
the 18th of October, 1862, out of fund
contributed by said second mortgage
bondholders, under an agreement between
themselves, dated November l, 1859.
Now then, the question presents itself,
what were the Services" for which this
payment was made, and when were they
rendered? To ascertain this, we need
only look at folio 142, where we find
these words: "And they further say,
touching the statements in bill of COM
plant rs to the services Of the defendant,
Samuel j. Tilden, that he had, long prior
to, and at the time of the commencement
of the foreclosure suit in the said bill of
complaint mentioned, been the counsel
for the second mortgage bondholders, IN
whose behalf such suit was instituted
and that he was counsel also for the
trustees of the said second mortgage
bondholders, and had been from some
time in the yerr 1857.
1t appears, therefore, that this money
was paid for services running through
fire gears anterior to 1862, and it does
not appear that any part whatever was
earned in that year. The decree fixing
and confirming the rights of the second
mortgage bondholders was entered at the
August term IN the year 1861, and the
sale itself took place as early as March
1862.
No appreciaJle part, II any, of this
item can therefore be Gpporttoned to the
gear 1862.
Ntnth Hem.-"November I. Services
to fl rst mortgage bondholders Of ST. Louis,
Alton AMI Terre Haute Railroad Com
pany, as per affidavit, $4,000"
This item was the original main stay
of the Times SANDER, and is still clung
to with considerable tenacity. In sup.
port Of its theory on the subject, the
Times has appealed to the Answer be-
tore mentioned. To this document we
now refer, and at page 81 we find the
following statements:
That the defendant, Tlden, for part
of his services aforesaid, also made Il
charge of the like sum of $4,000 on aC-
count of professional services rendered
to the first mortgage bondholders and
the receivers, which was paid to hm by
the said Azsrah g. Flagg, surviving re-
ceiver Us 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 reorgan L.
ization, or that ii was resolved by the pur-
chasing committee last aforesaid any
claim ior the defendant last aforesaid for
$4,000 against the reorganization be
allowed as in the said bill Of complaint
mentioned. (Fols. 146, l47. l4S.)
To ascertain the time of the rendition
of the services on account of which such
payment WAS made, the reader is refer,
red to the opposite page at folio IA,
where we find it stated that Mr.. Tllden
"was also the counsel for SAID receivers,
and that he also acted rs principal cOun-
sci for the said first mortgage bondhold.
ers, in relation to the foreclosure pro-
ceedings hereinbeforc mentioned, and
other proceedings connected Herewith,
and 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"
In other words, the services were
rendered in 1858, 1859, 1860 and 1861.
Ne considerable part of these serrices be.
tong to tie year 1862. The foreclosure
proceedings in which they were rendered
had already reached a decree in August,
1861.
am aware that most disingenous
construction has been put by the Times
upon n sentence from the answer which
have here quoted, viz, the words, land
to the year 1859, and were rendered
from time to time, during pc
riod of uplcards of three years thereat-
ter" The argument of the Times Is that
this sentence admits the continuance Of
these services during the whole of the
wear 1862. | submit 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 cX
pressly stated to have been before the
wear 1859. This is the true construction
of the words. 1t is their meaning. II
accords with the facts.
But, of course, if the writer desired to
ascertain the meaning AM 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 fore.
closure SUIT in which these services were
rendered was terminated in q decree as
early as August 8, 1861 Oolio GO, and
that the road was actually
sold in the month Of March,
1862. SO that there must have been a.
least nine months of the year ls62
which could not have called for these
services, and Is 10 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 adver-
tisement of sale, &c. Furthermore, the
payments which gave rise to the discussion
were both made before the close of the
year 1862, and it is so stated IN the
an>wir.
Il recol!ect rightly, the Times has on
a former occasion referred to the date of
the agreement of first mortgage bond
holders, set forth in the answer April
Is, 1861, as evidence thst the services
were of short continuance. But this
agreement was but the final contirma-
ton of negotiations which had been
going on for three years. There was a
preliminary agreement, adopted at
meeting of bondholders September 22d,
1859, and modified from time to time,
a -.