The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-06-29

navcr tad objected and had not set % ur
in their answer
You will be allowed Your per cent
rate 90 interest, gentlemen. on your cou-
pous ana also on your bonds after matur-
ity. said Justice Jackson
Mr. Joline then took up the question Of
what property the lien OF the tripartite
bonds covered as viewed from the stand
point Of the Central Trust Company. He
read the contract and construed Is liter
ally rs made under the laws governing
! such contracts. The language Gf she
mortgage showed that ii covered a spe-
ciiic property and then 1t sets out in de
tail the property subject % the mortgage.
Capt Cunningham called the attention
of the court TO the laws OF the Georgia
code on mortgages. They created no IL
tie, but they must specify the property
upon which the mortgage is given.
Upon that said Justice Jackson, eve
hold that this mortgage don't cover the
! after-acquired property, as that property
is not specified in the mortgage. There
| is not one word that shows that at least
two of the lease-hold interests are cover
ed by the mortgage" Has not the isu-
| preme court decided that the afler &c
quired lease-hold interest must DO held IL
able for the mortgageN'
I'VE don't think Capt. Cunningham
| said that the supreme court decisions go
quite that far He then specified what
property was held when the mortgage
was made and what was afterward ac-
quired.
WHAT THE NIORTAGE COVERED.
"We'll hear from Mr. Turner" Justice
! jackson said, ION whether the. mortgage
covers bonds and stocks We'will hear
! from you on the liability of the lease
! hold estates.
ut says that the mortgage can dispose
| of any property not necessary to the bust
! ness of the company said Capt. Cum
ningham, the leasehold estates are left
entirely out of the mortgage. They are
! not under the after acquired property
/ clause. because they were not after ac-
! quired property. They do not come I'M
! der the mortgage as they are nowhere
mentioned In the mortgage as required
| by the laws of Georgia. It was property
belonging at that time to the Central
Railroad and Banking Company, and was
not specified in the mortgage"
Mr. E. G. Weed wanted to know if the
Southwestern would be held liable as
surety.
THAT question may come up later"
said Justice Jackson 1T will under the
contract with the Central, and it will be-
come debtor of the Central"
MR.. MILLER ARGUES THE CASE.
Mr.. Frank H. Miller of Augusta then
took up the case and argued it for the
Southwestern. He said the only party
asking for a foreclosure here was the trus-
tee under the tripartite mortgage.
Our position" said he.
'is that the trustee under
the record mortgage is not in a position
to fOreclOse and demand the payment of
that mortgage under the pleadings or ev-
idence. The Central Trust Company is
estopped from claiming that the South
western is liable on the tripartite bonds,
as it accepted trust providing for this
payment and it can't put one bond ahead
of another Nor can it claim that the |
lien has prior right on the Central to
that of the Southwestern, as to the bonds
other than those to pay the tripartites."
DO you mean to say this $4,000 900 |
has no rights here?" asked Justice Jack
son.
No, sir" replied Mr.. Miller. There
are bonds set aside to
secure the tripartite mortage This
second mortgage has its rights when
properly presented, but the count should
not enforce them against those of whom
it has notice and undertook to pay off.
I'VE claim said Mr. Miller, 'that the
bonds outstanding at the date of the lease !
of the Southwestern were paid by the
the Central road not out of the proceeds
of the tripartite bonds but from its in
come. 1t also appears among the list OF
assets that they have 400 shares of South
western stock which they have hypothe-
Gated for the Georgia road lease. These
were issued in payment of extension of the
road done by the lessee itself"
DO you claim that these subsequent
transactions between the Central and
Southwestern removed 1t from liability
upon these tripartite bonds!" asked Jus
tice jackson.
$50 far as the Southwestern S liabilities
on these tripartite bonds between it and
,t,o1f - Al .
your honor we do. l understand your
honor to rule that the Macon and Yves
tern was not a necessary party to
these proceedings. Although this
road has not been made
a party defendant, the f. L. & T. Co.
have asked for decree of Joint foreclos-
ure against all the separate pieces of
property. Now, when the consolidation
was had, it was provided that neither of
the parties to the consolidation should be
freed from any of their contracts. Under
this last act of consolidation, which vests
all benefits and rights in the Central, we
claim release of the Southwestern from
liability, insisting that from the date of
consolidation after which all the bonds
were, in fact, issued, they were relieved
by this act of the legislature which re-
peals all loss in conflict thereto. The liza
bility is therefore one now resting on the
Central alone to pay off the entire debt,
the benefit of which it alone has received
oVERRULRD THAT POINT.
"Your proposition then is that
that legislative act consolidating the
companies and directing that the Central
should assume the debts of the Macon and
Western operated to relieve the South
western 'rom liability tripartite mort
gagel"
! Yes sir that's what we claim, said Mr..
| Miller, as against the Central Rail road.
1.-THE court overrules that proposition
distinctly and emphatically," said Justice
! jackson.
''Then so far as the Southwestern is con-
| cerned, if it is held liable, we are entitled
| to have "a full accounting and to know
! what benefit has beenreceived by the Cen
trail Railroad and Banking Company from
the use of these bonds. The equity of re-
! demption all the stock it owns should pass
under the decree of foreclosure to make
the property bring its full value and re-
| duce the liability of the Southwestern. -
Judge Speer; "What is the evidence to
| show that the Southwestern is liable only
as securityl'
Mr.. Miller: ''It is on the records that
the directors alone passed a resolution to
join in these bonds. They had no right to
do so otherwise than as surety for no
benefit was set out therein. The records
show that the Southwestern never re-
ceived any benefit from the bonds-all
1,ak -. 49,, Il a..