Claiborne guardian. [volume] (Homer, La.) 1877-188?, 1879-05-14
The Final Decision.
from the Ouachita Telegraph. ]

FROM the ouacni'a ie"s'apu'J
The Supreme Court Of the United States
rendered an opinion Oh Monday which
concludes the yrXatieHs litigation in the
matter of the final disposition Of the
Nicksbury, Shreveport. aud Texa. railroad.
Tie road is TO be sold, aud thus. at last,
Jarndyce and Jarudycc il removed from
Chancrry. Thi. road, rs tue most of the
readers Of this paper know, was chartered
with the eastern terminu. on the Missis-
sippi river. opposite yicksburg AID its
western terminus on the line dividing
Louisiana and Texas west of Shreveport.
From Shreveport to the Texas line, about
l. miles, aud from this place to Delta,
about ~ miles the road il now in opera
ton The intervening distance. between
Monroe and Shreveport. about ~ miles
has only been survryrd-three lines. if we
are not mistaken, having been run by ~
many different engineers, all prior to the
war.
In January, l-tii. the road and all the
property of the V. :. & +. railroad com
pany was seized upon the suit of W. r.
Gordon. of this parish. upon 500 worth of
unpaid coupons attached to four bonds of
$1,000 each, belonging 10 Mr.. Gordon. The
road was sold on the 3r,l Of February fol-
lowing. At the first offering Branncr x
Co. became the purchasers. bnt failing To
comply with the requirement.. of the Shnr
IN, the property was rcotiercd a few hours
subsequent, when Ludelinc and Associates
became the purchasers for Sj0oo0. Snit
was instituted by BraHfer Il Co. To anHHl
this sale the RESULT If which was to con-
firm the title of Ludrliug and Associates
To the road. This was in our State courts
meanwhile, u. X. Jackson. and Others,
holding mortgage bonds of the road issued
before the war. brought suit in the Fed
rral Courts to enforce their mortgage.
! There were 1Gl bonds of $1,000 each. with
interest accrued, interested in the suit.
The case, after being passed upon by
Judge Woods, /. =. Circuit JHdgt of tins
District, was appeal ii To the United States
/ supreme Court. There the case was de-
Cidrd adversely To i.udriing aud Associates
aud the road was dccrrrd tn bc sold ac-
cor,lIng to the laws of thi. State to salts
fy the claims of jackson aud the other
bundhu,dcrs.
Judge WOotl- appointed n receiver for
the r"ad-Mai J. ". Green. who il vet in
charge of the road. and Master in Chan.
Gerry, t" tltt efmine the value Ell the pro
prrty and the value of Improvement, made
up"n the road 10y Labelling and Associate,
white III charge. The Master Ia thanCrry
rendered his statement for what amour.
"" cannot say. Labelling and Associates,
however, claimed a balance due them
from the bondholicrs of the V. :. d I.
railroads, Of : .EhiuIl -. Judge Woods
rendered judgement for ahout >.,uU. 100 IN
favor If Ludclln. and Associates. for bet
tefmeHts. The decree of TIE !. =. Supreme
Court ordering the road sold being i'm
prrltlNr until the amount III dispute could
hc settled hy appeal To- the supreme Court.
7" which both parties appealed from thc
decision of Judge Wood-. II We, on this
appeal aud cross appeal that the supreme
Court rendered its opinion on Monday,
referred Ia ID ih" ont ~rf-n >uii involving.
~ viii hr understood, the simple question al
villa amount Irdrling aud Associates were
entitled to ont of the proceeds of the >tlc Of
the road, and not in any way affecting the
ownership of the road which still remains
IN the hands al III" original stockholders,
subject to a decree at sale tn satisfy the
mort gage held Icy jackson and other bond
holders Of the road As we learn from