New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-10-22
THE COURTS.
sl-srAINIyG rHE MANHATTAN LEAsE.

SUSTAINING THE MANHATTAN LEASE.
JUsUc wtsTBRooEs Dfc.sIcS on TIE NOTION
OF TN: NRw-YoRK COMPANY TO HAVE IFS
PROPERTY RESTORED.
Justice Westhrooz, OF tho supreme Conrt
yesterday passn on the motion Of tie Nev-Iok Bee
waited Railroad Company TO De restored to tie p''s''
sion ~ It's property made in the si' d. Ruh ny tbe Az
togucv-Ccnera for the dissolution o. the IHnitl'h
Railway Cougauy. lie l.ai cyart ia jay GCnids Office
in The Western Union ildn- AZ noon md BIS decision
was heard BY Eu.s.n SAGE. president oi the
Mefrorol en- Company r. NJ. Galway prcs
dent ~ the Manhattan Company, judge
Dillon and a. T.. HOpsn4 receivers ior the Manhattan
Comiany WAGER svaync. Francis Lawrence, 4. j. Van
derpoel Charles g. Alexander and J. r. Bacon 81 conn
eel for the various parties 10 t3 sun, E0a o. Cyrus W.
Field president OF the yewYorS Companr, aud two or
three youn- lawyers Justice WcstbrcoE had prepared
Iourdc,son which he had in writing. ard from Which ho
read extracts lie refused 90 permit il to go ont Of Bis
hands until be- coGld distribute IL in printed FORM
He remarked before beginning 20 read tat
the decision had cost him two days OF hard work. since
the arguments on the supplemental petition and motion
had ONLY been submttel to aim OF ast Mon ay TIC ar
guman's on the original application, however, were MADE
orally NJ KINGSTON more than a month ago.
Justice wcs- brook held that under tho nnben6"m
clause OF the eac the contract of lease dl not ternn
ate until the time hld exp red. the corporation hal
ceased TO exist ny operation ~ law. He made diSnc
tion between cable" and "capabe," thc latter being
the wori employed IN tho lease) and argued that
corporat'n7 mi,h NOT be ahlo 20 lhl The terms oi
conractbr reason ~ TIA insovencv for instanco-a"1
We, he cqrnNe" corporation. on the question - FOR
fc.tYrc FOR non-iayiuet o al tnt"r'"t ANA u!Nlru'
n, sI substantially. that tie directors Of the new
York Comutuv having enc0uTa-ol ~ thrlr atIs ihH
rou-ngvrret 70 Dc esTppcd from set M " up H
IRON IA of forfeiture A. 20 the allure 10 pay tiNc'
said that Manila an bound ohly 10 nay the rGhi
faxes Tse ques ion Of tlc lc .av ~ The taNee bh'
however been ?ai..d AMI gs IL contained al cntn! Oh
doubt tue Court could not PISS ~ u undrF tIc h"l"H
bii would hold that q forfeiture did not exist
In In. cpur.r of his opinion '- ice NeHtDruok dwrt
on the sorry NJ the Manhattan Company ana -ad ha
II shO wed that the men VINO now couTo tu tho
New YORK ami airtroputln CuupInle1 organizer tle
Manhattan Company, loaded their holdln on NJ III
poccut uuuic and trying 20 put the STOCK ol
of exist cuce Tie whole question raBrl by te mourn
wne one nf d-cr tiuu vita the Court, and he snolh OF
low hs own decision in the ease OF l-fle-lonDtul
questions uf fact and law being involved ne Hohli b"t
n - on tacln in the manner chlcd lot Oy
T. otion. bIt mold them for determine ION ut the tlh
TIe tht rcfnfc denied the motion without prCulcc 10
further applicstiOns JuE.tce WcslbrOOk lntln Yea
that the Manhattan Company might have Nahd Claims
a ans the lessor companlr for tc iull payment OF the
$1,000 600 stock Issued to them IN The rin 81 con
y c bonds: stated expressly, after finishing hls
reading that he would pnt express an opinion thlS
poiut ThercupOn Wager SwGluc o. Tie receivers u
liod for an order nstrctiu the receivers 10 ste Tor me
recovery OF Sc 800 600 each from the New-fOrk anu
Me- rouOl itau COMPANIES. The motion was granted