Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1877-11-09
NUMBER 20.

But it cannot be held that the parties are
concluded and bound by aequiescenco or
consent, to anything different from the real
substance and fact Of the successive proceed
ings, etc, as they were understood and in
tended by all concerned. If the Canada
company could have fOreseen that it would
have been possible result OF the c0mpro-
Hlse decree that this sale a. asked for 10
the petition should be made. it would never
| have been party to the compromise con-
summsted by that decree The same may
be said OF the mortgage bondholders. Nor
would the hclders OF the trust loans have
become such if it had been forecast as posi-
BILE that not only the promises to pay. but
the pledges of, and specific security, were
| by Judicial act and sanction to be "broken
to the hope" disclaimed and annulled.
As the position of claimants and creditors
has become fixed in view Of the compromise
decree they are entitled to have that view
realized to themselves respectively to the
fullest extent practicable. They cannot be
| bound to the legal character of the receiv-
ership of 1861, as the essential purpose of
that was changed by the decree OF 1854.
1t is plain that the Canada company and
the mortgage bondholders hold a position
different from that of the creditors Of the
trust, and while the expenses properly in
SuILSu III tue management bIo W uc ptll |
before the benefciaries OF the trust are enti-
tied to partake OF the earnings, these eI-
penses are not charge upon the corpus of
the property in priority to other rights and |
interests IN such a sense and manner a. TO |
render the sale asked for lawful and needful. |
The Canada company stands upon their |
lease under the compromise decree, with the |
right to have the stipulated rent paid out OF |
the net earnings. Subject to this, the Ver-
mont Central company stand upon their /
mortgages, with the right to have the net
earnings appropriated according to the re-
spective provisions of these mortgages. The
holders of the trust bonds stand upon the
rights created and vested by the respective
transactions constituting their issue, and
the right to the security provided. The
hoatlng debt has no precedence to any other
of the trust debts. The fact that it has no
specific security does not give it higher
rank or different right from debts with Sc
eurity. There would be no warrant for
making it first in right as to means of pay
ment, even in case of proper receiversnip.
The status OF the hts and liabilities OF the
respective parties and interests can be prop
erly determined when the specific rights are
sought to be enforced.
In conclusion. the opinion states that the
Central Vermont is to be regarded. not as a
|
aging agent for the parties in interest, hav-
ing relation primarily to the rights OF the
ceStuis que trust, and in view OF that rela-
tiOn there is no warrant of law for order
ing sale CT the property. The citations in
the brief OF the petitioners were reviewed,
and were shown to furnish no support or
cOuntenance to the sale that is asked upon
the reason assigned. "lf the property it.
self IN the hands of the Central Vermont is
subject to lien. as claimed, such lien would
not warrant an order of sale in the first in-
stance. 1t would 90 a redeemabe lien.
resting on the property in the character of
an equitable mortgage. and sale would be
ordered in any event only ON failure to re-
deem according to the final decree In
that behalf As the petition could not
be granted. the relations of the various
interests In the property to the lien were
not further considered. The purposes
Tor which the sale was sought, the trans
fer of the property to the Central Vermont
corporation, and confirmation of title in it.
does hot constitute reason for granting
the petition. The scandal spoken OF by
counsel as being rife, touching the railroad
management. Is beyond the cOgnizance and
consideration of the court. Tne court does
not volunteer action causes. but acts upon
applications made by intrusted and proper
parties. When applications are made. the
court acts upon them. subject to estab-
ll>hcd modes OF procedure, departure
from which will often render q judgment
void.
That the existing system Of managing the
property is cumbrous and expensive, does
not, nor does the plan of reorganization, as
IL is called, fall within the cogniZance OF
the court. However, We may personally
regret that the enterprise put on foot by
the decree of 1864, ss it has gone on. has
failed in proposed and expected results. and
that embarraSsments are seriOul, and COM
plieations are as yet unsolved by any means
that have been attempted, it does not be-
hoUye the court, for the purpose of making
g an end all " Of this hydra of conten-
tion. bitterness. loss and litigation, to pro-
nOunce as law what is not law, to adopt
and authorize measures not known to. nor
warranted by the law in such case. Every
body but culprits, who are in danger OF
feeling "the halter draw subscribe to c
and insist on the maxim - fiat justitia ruat
c cslum.' The justice of that maxim means $
legal justice, justice evolved and made oper
stiye by the administration OF tho law.
and interests in railroads, both
personal and public, are subject to the
principle and sentiment OF that maxim. /
The parties have produced the troublesome d
case. The law in its administration can a
give relief only by lawful means. /.
The pro lorna decree OF the Court of ,
Chancery dismissing the petition WAS at :
trmed, and a mandate will be sent down
.o that effect. =