The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-01-16
Z" WITH BAIED BREATH I.
The City Has Waited for
the Railroads to Act.
THE OLD AND THE NEW BONDS.
City Bound 10 Guarantee Whether
New Bonds Were Issued Before the
Old Were Taken Up or Not-General
Arguments.

Arguments.
The Springfield bond endorsement hear
ing was continued before the supreme
bench today. All affidavits were
disposed of yesterday and
the session today was given up to general
arguments laid down in the briefs as given
in THE NEWS last night.
City Solicitor Colwell continued his
argument where he left off yesterday
afternoon. He contended that rail-
road Is public benefit and
all legislation that tends to the improve
ment OF rail facilities is for the good OF
the towns along the line OF the road and
should receive due consideration.
Must Keep Faith.
"The Providence and Springfield people
were given to understand that they could
rely upon the city of Providence to
stand back Of them in their efforts to ex-
tend the road" said the city solicitor.
SssWe, cannot break faith with
them. II the city of Providence has de-
rived benefit from the improvement OF
the road 10 is under obligation to stand by
its part of the compact. 1t Is claimed that
the proposed action is in the nature OF a
benefit to the bondholders only.
/ do not so understand it. II
the bonds go to protest II the lease be de-
faulted the bondholders will sell them at
q sacrifice and the road itself will have
to settle the loss. We have nothing to do
with what somebody else may make out
',fthe difference for which these bonds may
sell. Through this road the city will get
what II has sighed and prayed for. With
bended knee and bated breath we have
waited for what our railroad connections
have in store for US.
Legal Authorization Not Necessary.
sIs thsre any act authorizing us to rec
ompense the road?' asked Attorney Gard
ner.
"That il the question" replied the city
solicitor. 'Tt is enough for us to know
that the Springfield road, unless assisted,
WILDE visited by destruction that will re-
act upon US. II Is matter Of self-preserva-
tion ~ well a. honor.
The Complainants Arraigncd.
"who authorised these complainants to
appear and represent themselves as the
voice of the taxpayers Of the cityf BY what
right do they attempt to legislate for the
whole peoplef They do not voice the sem
timent of the people OF Providence"
ssAs figure it out the city will get an
interest of per cent. on its investment.
Suppose when the bonds became due we
are Obliged to pay them? 1t is only
comparatively small amount at the most"
"T'he bonds cannot be applied to the
payment of the indebtedness because the
bonds have not yet been issued" inter-
posed Judge 6tiness.
Counsel Ripley declared that the bonds
were issued before the other bonds were
taken up.
"Before the bonds were issued the city
had refused to guarantee them," said Mr..
Tillinghast.
"If those bonds were issued before the
other bonds were taken up, 1t was con-
formity with the, act, and does not require
argument for reimbursement" said Judge
0tinoas. ~ 1li
Unless the court can find that the act
of the city council was not in conformity
with the act Of the legislature IL cannot
interpose to prevent" said Mr.. Colwell.
"You hold, then, that the city Is bound
20 guarantee the bonds whether they
were issued before or after the taking up
OF the old bonds?" asked Judge Tilling-
hast.
"Exactly," replied Mr.. Colwell.
sTf the arguments of the complainants
prevail we will be left in fearful dilemma,
for they would then apply to all cases
where authority is asked of the legislature
to borrow money.
"H is simplecas Of good faith pledged
to the road.1e
MAY ask who pledged these bonds in
behalf OF the cityf" asked Mr.. Gardner.
~ don't say that rarty or individual
did It" replied the city solicitor "but one
branch of the city government favored it.
"As TO the mortgage objection. The
mortgage was matter Of record and
everybo knew IL. As a matter OF fact
this mortgage is first mortgage of the
Springfield property. Technically and in
substance II is first mortgage"
How the Receivers See II.
Mr.. A. A. strout Of Boston, counsel for
and New England began an
exhaustive argument in favor OF the guar
anty of the bonds. 'eThis bill
in equity asks for an injunction against
IN ect of . coordinate branch OF the
koNehhinent anu hghinsJ the city gov
eminent" He said There must
be certainty that sSfne great injury will
be done before the aid of the court
Is invoked. This is not a subscription
Of stock or donation to the
road, but guaranty OF bonds which are
guaranteed by the New York and New
England railroad. The complain
ants allege that endorsement
may lead to litigation and that they, as
taxpayers, may be called upon to bear
their proportionate part. The OBJ
jection Is shadowy and speculative
upon the possibility that at some future
time they or their descendants may
be called upon 10 pay the
bonds the complainants come into
court and ask relief. What probability
b there that they will ever be in any way
injured. Before that can occur