Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1898-03-11
NEW LONDON NORTHERN.
Her Stockholders Object to a
Transfer

On the Part Of the Central vermont---
some spicy Arguments Before a MassB-
chusetts Legislative Committee at Bos-
ton Tuesday.
Inc Massachusetts legislative committee
on railroads gave hearing on the petition
OF Jhe American Loan d Trust company
ior an act approving of the transfer, by
mortgage, to the petitioners by the Central
vermont Railroad company of the inter
est OF the same, as lessee, in the Northern
railroad company.
Elmer Z. Howes, representing the petit
TONERS, appeared before the committee and
explained the conditions following the re-
ownership of the Central Vermont, which
directed the proposed legislation as most
Oenehclal to the maintenance Of the entire
! central Vermont Railroad system I'm
less the present cloud as to the mortgage
was removed, as was proposed by the bill,
he said there was possible danger of the
! separation of the New London railroad
from the Central Vermont system, which
would virtually ruin all chances of the
central Vermont system for competition
for New York freights. To Mr.. Haskins
OF Kockport, Mr.. Howe admitted that the
effect of the failure of the proposed bill to
]
American Loan d Trust company. To
l.. ). Dabney, representing the trustees of
the will Of b. b Cheney, Mr.. Howe ad-
mitted that one of the features of the or
ganlzatlon scheme of the Central Vermont
railroad was capitalization Of 81, 600
| an OF winch was to be Owned by the Grand
| trunk railroad of Canada, and that the
| Io'al indebtedness was Sl4, 600 600 or so.
| 10 MIR. Hoar, representing the Boston d
| Albany road, Mr.. Howe admitted that
there was never any record of the mort
gage IN either Of the states of Massachu-
sets or Connecticut. This closed the case
for the petitioners
Then the fun began. A Brandegee.
counsel for the New London railroad. ad-
dressed the committee in opposition, refer
ring to his long official connection with
the New London railroad.
1--WE were here some time ago" he said.
when we wanted to lease our road to the
Central Vermont railroad and we asked
your consent and approval to the lease
we got 1t, and in the light of day. We
did not come up here six years after we
had done the thing and ask you for your
approval of it. And the lease that was rat
lied by this legislature included the pro-
vision that there should be no transfer of
the lease without the consent of the stock
holders of the New London Northern, and
furthermore that no transfer should obtain
without the consent and approval of the
legislature of Massachusetts which grant
ed the original lease. II was decreed then
that the Central Vermont should not Join
with any other line without your consent.
But what has been done" These money
lenders, who appear before your commit
these pf tr-l,,
loaned the money at two for one. have
skulked up to the sno Hdrifts of 81. AL
bans and have taken the transfer of the
New London Northern lease, without the
consent of either stockholders Of the road
or the Massachusetts legislature Now
they wanted ratification of this action,
and once the approval is given by the Mas
sachusetts legislature, under street fore
closure of the Central Vermont the New
London Northern would slip from the
grasp OF its stockholders into the grip of
money lenders, whom the holders didn't
know and didn't want to know This
very question was in the United States
court, Vermont district, and during the
recess of said court the petitioners Slid
down here with a bill. whose enactment
affords them the opportunity to 60 back to
the court and TO say that all things have
been made new and that the sinners have
been forgiven
Samuel Hoar associated with Mr.. Bran
degee as counsel for the New London Il
Northern, opposed the bill as contrary to
the policy of the state Of Massachusetts,
and for the protection of the stockholders
OF the New London Northern. If APPROX
al was to be granted, it should only be on
the consent of the New London Northern
stockholders
In presenting the remonstrance of the /
Cheney estate, L. 5 Dabney brought out
with greater force points which the com /
mittee had heard, but evidently failed to
grasp, that under the reorganization scheme /
81 ,OOOOO OF bonds was to 90 into the /
treasury of the corporation with a capital /
stock OF SO, 900 for the Improvement of .
the property" and SlOO,O 900 for the ex-
penses of the bondholders, committee, and |
the counsel. Unless the proposed legisla-
ton was enacted, he said, there was an eff
fectual block TO the iniquitous scheme
which offered no absolute guarantee to
holders of first mortgage bonds on the
Central Vermont property.