The New York herald., 1878-02-24
The ERIE SUITS.
3 RULYNos--

EXCEPTIONS TO REFEREE sPENCER's RULINGS
THE ACCOUNTING TO 90 ON.
The suits OF the creditors OF The Ere Railway Com.
pany against that corporation, asking the fore.
closure OF certain mortgages, were continued yester.
day before Judge Spencer the referea The proceed.
ings heard IN the company's oihces, Chambers
street, at ten O'Clock. Tho same array OF counsel
whose names have already appeared 10 the HxRALs
watched the interests OF the several parties concerned
Mr. Arden, on behalf OF three OF the Erie Con-.
pany's creditors offered writing set OF exccp,iona
10 the Referees tu.ing, OF which The following s the
substance
l. That the referee ruled or decdcd that he had nc
power nor jurisdiction " determine the matter see
iortn in the objections, whereas lie ought 10 have
ruled tnat ue had power and Jurisdiction determine
the matter set iortn the obJectons should have
sustained said objections.
That The rsisrcs ruled that he had power nor
Jurisdiction take evidence 10 establish tbs facts sss
fortn by the objectors, whereas he ought 10 have
ruled lnst he had such power aud Jurisdiction, and
should have received evidence TO esaDsh such acts.
8. That the referee ruled that he had power nor
Jurisdiction TO RrSnt the motion proposed wkereaa
ought 10 have ruled that had such power ju-
risdlcton, aua should have granted tne motions.
!. That tho referee decided to take the objections
request and the answer OF tue receiver, and the
motion go made, ana 10 80 on with tue accounting
and 10 report tue objection, request, answer and
tious TO the Court, with any exceptions made to said
rulings with .e rsieroe's report OF ,he accounts u
the receiver, whereas the referee should have ruled
TO suspend the accounting 'uUtll the accounts would
be separated, US asked ior by tho objectors
Ihe referee rusd that tho par,ics oDJcotors must
seek any remedy desired Ia the premises from The
CourI the comiag of the roicrces report OF tho
whole matter whereas tue referee should have ruled
before proceeding with The accounting either he
had power aud Jurisdiction TO decide the questions
Raised by the obJoctoTs, or " he Gccided that had
not such power jurisdiction he should have ccrted
the obcciions with tne proco odngs thcrcupon
supreme Court ior It's decision and INSTRUCTIONS before
proceeding with the accounting
Ihe referee ruled that u the Court should decide
that the objections arc we'll taken aud that the
dcnce proposed should be taken by referee,
uIect tne referee ia INC premises and such evidence
can be made The subject or u supplementary report
whereas should beve ruiel the Ques.
tons raised ny the otJoctors should 10 hearu aud
proper evidence IA support VI them received. ana o
decision rendered, clthor by The referee by the
Court before compelling the defendants. VINO object,
proceoG with an accoanting IN manner Ia which
their Iiguts and Interests canuot be properly prv-
tcctcd.
!. That the referee ruled thai sny dccision 10 The
premises must no mads oy tho Court aud cannot pa
mace by tue reiutee
Mf arden made motion that the referee should
forthwith esrtiy the objections oil tbe defendants,
Court foe Us dccisiob, aud that in The me.
until The rendering OF sucn decision she accounting
bo suspended.
DKcisioS Iux RkFERKE
The reiefee dtciaed lLst lie ooG.d not grant NJ.
ArdcDs niotios, Dut that he would certify ne ro-
questea, with hrs report ou tho accounting aud he
also uec,ded 70 20 Oh with The accounting
Ut. Arden excepted 10 the decision OF the referee.
aud the accounting proceeded against his protest Ne
wsBeo II 10 be unicrssooa that his objections were
manner waved by MS continuing TO represent his
cnonts upon the sccoun nting as " proceeded
IL was tncn deemed 10 adJourn iur,Dsr action upon
the involved unli thursday. March l. ~ eleven
O'Clock