Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1877-11-09
IFrum the Boston Advertiser, Nov. 5.
vermont Courts.

Many hard things have been said about the
courts Of Vermont by those who have invest
ed money III that state and lost thereby. and
the most III feeling and the greatest sense Of
injustice have been experienced 10y the hold
ers Of Vermont and Canadn stock and the Sc
curit,s 81 he Vermont Central railroad The
power and influence OF the railroad ring have
been suppos d to be so great that II has gen
orally been believed that the courts were
ready at any time 10 do whatever might be
desired 10y. or be for the interest Of the ring
The receivers and managers have so long pro
claimed themselves officer OF the court Of
cAlucery. and have sustained their peculiar
transactions by claiming that they had the
authority Of chancellor and his DEGREES for all
that they have done, that public opinion has
identified them with the courts and placed the
blame fcr misInanagement where it did not
really belong. So prevalent was tins opinion
that when the receivers asked the court for u
Judicial sale Of all the railroad property III
their charge and went TO the supreme court
with that petition backed 10y a favorable opin-
ION given 10y one OF the judges. when lie pro
for1ua' denied the petition. ali interested per
SONS expected that the supreme court would
comply with the wishes Of the ring and even
strain the law 20 favor its purposes
The surprise. therefore, is universal at the
independent action Of the court i'll it, recent
decision II Is evident that the court j, en-
tre!y free from any. even the slightest i'm
proper influence. The decision is based upon
principles OF law and equity. and the supreme
Court Of Vermont may be relied upon TO do
justice without fear or favor The court dis
claims any responsibility for the management
Of the railroads, and very properly because
no question concerning such management has
been before the supreme Court since there
has been reason 10 complain. This may not
be generally understood, but il occurred in
this way Tn, Suprem. Court consists Of
seven judges appointed 10y the Legislature
every two years from different parts Of the
stat. As soon as they are appointed they
assign 10 each other certain counties in which
TO hold court each judge Is il equity pro
ceedlngs a chancellor. and can act IN that ca
pacity il any part Of the State. but it is Gus
tornary TO have all proceedings IN one county
brought before the chancellor to whom that
county has been assigned. The old case IN
which all the railroad pro--, diugs have been
held. was commenced and renamed pending
III Franklin county. and III. Judge and chan
celior to whom that county has been assigned
for the last i've or SIX years is Judge Royce Of
St Adams. None of the DEGREES and orders
which have occa,ioned tn embarrassment of
the property have been before the Supreme
Court al al, only before the chancellor for
Franklin county. The Supreme Court. as
such especially the other siN Judges. may
properly. therefore, say that they are not re
sponsble for any Of these DEGREES or orders.
The recent opinion takes away from all
these Objectionable proceedings the sanction
Of the court, and decides that the compron-
Use decree Of 1854 lso-calledI and all subse-
quent DEGREES and orders of court (so-called
have no judicial force as emanating from tn,
court they are only agreements Of the par
ties This opinion is contrary 10 what must
have been the view Of Judge Royce, because
since 1872 he has allowed DEGREES TO be enter
ed up, not only without the assent of all par
ties interested, but against the protest of
some Of the parties most largely interested
and has refused to allow the protesting par
ties to appeal TO the Supreme Court. The
court hold that neither the trust debt nor the
floating debt have a lien on the property, and
that therefore the property cannot Le sold 10
raise money 10 pay either. This is as far as
II was necessary for the court 10 60 in this
particular proceeding but in the discussion
of the relations between the parties it is very
plainly intimated that the Vermont and Can
ada still has the first lien on the net earnings
for its rent; subject to that claim are the
claims Of the FIRST and second mortgage bonds
OF the Vermont Central railroad.