The morning news., 1893-06-27

Of Georgia, in April 1891, entered into a
contract 10 lease that road and TO guaran'
tee those bonds; then the Central and
the Richmond and Danville made con-
tract with Alexander Brown q Sons
bankers, for that purpose.
TERMS OF THE CONTRACT.
"In the contract 10 the bondholders'
committee made by the Central and the
Richmond and Danville, they proposed
that these 81, 100000, a part Of the bonds,
should 60 in payment Of the old bonds
and part should go in payment Of the
expenses of cOurt-the property was then
in the state court-and certain claims for
right of way and others which were
regarded as prior TO the bonds. In
that situation the Central and the Dan.
vile said to Alexander Brown & Sons, II
you will take the balance of these bonds
with our guarantee, pay up the balance or
money on this property and give us $780,
900 in cash in addition, we Will sell you
the surplus bonds between the number
of bonds that were going to the old
bondholders and the S2, 600. / have
the receipt signed by the presidents of
| these railroads with Alexander Brown &
Sons that they did pay that S15O,OO0
They did pay off prior existing
liens and it was in that way Alex. Brown
Il Sons acquired a large part of their
holdings in the Macon Il Northern r. r.
Those are the facts about that transact
| ion and there is no where presented
in this record u scintilla of evidence that
| that contract was made by the Central
K. r., for the benefit of the Richmond &
/ Danville. Itwas a contract made by the
! Central r. r., as is shown by the record,
| for its own benefit
"The lease was a Joint estate. There
was no partnership. The power of the
Central Il. r., to make the lease, was abb
! solute, abundant, express and uncontra-
! dicted. 1t Is the same power by which
| the Southwestern was leased, same pow
! er bywhich the Augusta and Savannah
was leased, and its provisions are ex-
| tremely broad"
| Mr.. Calhoun had started upon another
line of argument when he was interrupted
by Mr., Justice Jackson and informed that
the other side would be given hearing.
THE CENTRAL. IS LIABLE.
Gentlemen" !" said Justice Jackson, as
he interrupted Mr. Calhoun, ''are there
any more parties to be heard upon this
ques tion2'
No other attorney addressed the court,
and Justice jackson said:
Gentlemen, we overrule that demur
rer. The Central is bound on its guaran-
tee. The Pennsylvania railroad case
don't cover the question, nor does any
other authority quoted. There was am
pie time for consideration of any points
in the charter or contracts under which
the guarantee was made. We therefore
hold that the Central is liable on all
these guarantees. We will now take up
the next question" !"
Mr.. Robert B. Turner, representing the
Farmers Loan and Trust Company of
New York, thought the foreclosure suit
brought by that company was next in
order.
MIR. Joline, representing the Central
Trust Company, mentioned the cross bill
that had been filed by the Southwestern,
holding that that road was not liable on
the tripartite bonds. He said he had
not yet pleaded to that bill and no testi-
mony had been taken on it,
Mai A. o. Bacon, for the Southwest
ern, objected to any delay. He said the
fundamental proposition was that the
Southwestern was not liable on these
bonds, and that it was ON them Illegally.
He said that the mortgage held by the
Central Trust Company on the Central
did not extend to the southwestern. and
that the Farmers Loan and Trust Com
pany claimed to have lien on both
properties. Something was said about
one of the parties claiming to have liens
cd the Southwestern, and Justice jackson
remarked:
You will all claim the earth and the full
ueSS bl6ECOl. L WOulu SuBS6Sb ludG lnb
council get together and agree as to the
facts.
DENIED HIS JURISDICTION.
Mr. G. N. West, representing Jno. S.
Silvey of Orange, n. Y, claimed that the
court had no jurisdiction in the suit of
the Farmers Loan and Trust Company
VS.. the Central Railroad and Banking
Company, because the bill was not a de-
pendant bill and the mere fact that the
property was in the possession of the
court, did not make it a dependant bill
The only fact, he said, upon which it
could be considered dependant bill, is
that the property is in the hands of re-
ceiVer, The mere possession of the prop
erty by the court could not give it juris-
diction of the proceedings under this bill.
Justice jackson Overruled the point
made by Mr.. West, saying that the prop
erty was in the possession of the court
and that the court had jurisdiction to en-
tertain any plea, bill, etc. without re-
gard to citizenship The court, he said,
was in lawful possession of the property
and every lien claimant had a right to
come into the court and ask for his rights.
Mr.. Crawford put in word every now
and then and his shots always hit the
mark. He was shut out on one point, how
ever, when he endeavored to show that
the court had no jurisdiction to entertain
the foreclosing suit under the Rowena
Clarke bill. Justice jackson informed
him that it was not necessary to debate
that point.
THE sOUTHwEsTERN's LIABILITY.
Justice jackson instructed Attorneys
Joline and Bacon to get together and agree
as to the facts in the issue between their
clients and to bring up the points of law
to-day.
The question, therefore, that will
| come up first is as to whether the South
western is liable or the tripartite mort
gage to which its name is affixed, and
| after that point is decided the foreclos-
| ure suit will be heard.
If the court decides to entertain the
| foreclosure suit and to determine the
| sale Of the road, the question of the re-
moval of the receiver will not come up.
| as a decree of sale within short time
would do away with dispute in regard to
| that question. Otherwise the motion for
the removal of the receiver will probably
be entertained during the hearing
The impression scenes to be that q
| sale will be ordered at this hearing, and
in fact the proceedings yesterday seemed
to indicate that such would be the case.
1t was very clear that Justice Jackson
intends to expedite matters as much as
possible, and that he will write up the
hearing in short order. He does not pid-
die over facts, but asks for points of law
and decides on them at once, and it is
| hardly probable that the hearing will
| last more than three daVS at the outside