The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-06-12


make an agreement with the new company
concerning: Firstly.-The determination
of the price and the conditions TO be pro-
posed TO the eventual purchaser Sec
ondly-The division of the proceeds of the
sale should such sale be effected.
After due consideration the court. Aug.
2 1901, decreed that the iquidatoT might
enter into a contract with the new company
as desired. Acting under this Specine au-
thorlty, the liquidator on Dec. 4, lSol, en-
tered into contract with the new company
whereby IL was expressly agreed that the
price and terms of sale should be lett 10
the new company and that the DIVISION OF
the proceeds between that company ana
the receiver Qiquidator) should be left 10
arbitrators named in the new contract
Thereupon the new company made its oner
or sale TO the United States. The proceed
ings are entirely regular and will be
recognized by the bar in perfect har-
mony with the practice that maintains in
the courts of the United States.
POWER TO SELL.
THE power TO sell is sanctioned in the
most unequivocal terms. The only matters
unsettled are distribution of the proceeds
of sale between the liquidator and the new
company. and after that is determined the
distribution of the proceeds between the
creditors of the old company for whose
benefit the court administers the fund. But
as to these matters we do not have the
remotest possible concern. We will hold the
property free of all French claims and the
creditors will participate in the distribution
of the funds derived from the sale, agree
ably to the law in the French courts.
1T seems to me that the views OF the MI
nority with respect TO the power OF the new
company to convey to the United states
good title are perfectly sound and consis-
tent with the practice OF the French and
American courts.
The position OF the majority is certainly
not we'll founded. 1t seems to me that they
have taken an entirely erroneous view OF
the subject. Among other objections they
urge with confidence is the following:
courts might make to throttle the bond
holders and stockholders of the old COM
pany, as stated in the deposition of Nj.
Lampre. even if those courts should hold
that the rights of these 100000 people are
exterminated by the DEGREES of the French
courts, we could not close the doors of our
courts against such litigants. When they
appeal to our courts for their rights as
against the United States as the holder of
through the judgments of our Supreme
court and OF our state courts In many ad-
judged cases, that they could compel us 10
pay the bonds of the old company with 5
per cent interest from the date OF issue,
and also the interest due on the stock sub
scrfptionS for at least ninety-nine years or
else surrender the property TO them or TO
the company. IL not having any lawful au-
thority to sell 20 the United States. There
appears to be no possible escape from this
dilemma through any legal proceeding.
Upon what authority will dissatisfied
bondholders and stockholders of the old
company obtain admission to our courts
their rights? We could not close the doors
of our courts against such litigants. say
the majority. Why? Are the French courts
powerless to pass final DEGREES and give
litigants repose? Is ii the rule of our
courts to take Jurisdiction of foreign liti-
giants and their causes after they have pro-
ceeded to final DEGREES?
1.-The question has been asked whether the
liquidator can enter into contract with
| the new company for sale to the United
| States which would radically change the
| contract of sale to the new company.
II am clearly of opinion that he do
| so. He could not do so without the author
| ity of the court having jurisdiction of the
parties interested in the estate of the old
| company. That court authorized the liQui-
| dator to make the contract with the new
| company, and by proper decree or order
| II may authorize him TO consent 10 mOdi-
| fication of the contract or to a sale of the
| property of the new company, if that be
| deemed at all necessary, on the terms and
| In the manner now proposed. The liQui-
| dator is but the arm of the court. The
| court may clearly direct him, in the exer-
| else of his broad equitable discretion to
| consent to change the contract with the
| new company, accept his share of the pro-
| ceeds of the sale to the United States and
distribute 1t to the parties before the court
| their rights and equities may appear.
/ This is in accordance with universal prac-
| tice. There Is nothing novel or extraordi-
nary about it: it is in consonance with the
| everywhere.
CONCESSIONS FROM COLOMBIA
Under the concessions of the Colombian
government to the French companies the
new Panama Canal Company cannot sell
TO the United States without the consent
of that government Such consent has been
stands ready to grant the necessary con-
| IN he ad a..
to construct and forever maintain and
operate the canal Our right to construct
the canal will not be derived from the new
canal company, but must come from a
treaty direct with the Colombian govern
| ment.
The Republic of Colombia will give to
| the United States all necessary jurisdiction
| over the canal and territory requisite for
| its construction and operation. The United
| States will pay to 1t a reasonable annual
compensation, to be fixed by the two gov
| ernments every hundred years, except the
amount to be fixed for the first term at the
end OF fourteen years. The sum Of SIC 900
shall be paid by the United States upon
ratification OF a treaty, but IL is to be ac-
counted for in subsequently fixing the an
nual compensation. This is proposed by
the Republic of Colombia but is subject to
the further action of the two governments
1t is evidence of the disposition of the Re
public of Columbia TO grant to the United
States necessary concessions, and have no
! doubt that fair treaty will be effected be-
| tween the two governments.
| The pending bill appropriates so much
| money as may be needed to secure control
| of the necessary territory belonging to
| Costa Rica and Nicaragua for canal pur-
| poses and in addition the sum OF So
| 100000 for carrying forward the work of
| construction. The Spooner amendment APP
| propriates such sum may be required TO
acquire the necessary rights from the Re-
public of Colombia 100000 must be paid
| upon the ratification of the treaty. and
a for ardf inc
| and in addition SIC, 900, 900 for the purchase
| pany. These various sums, amounting to
100000 are to be paid from the funds
now In the treasury.
| According 20 the commission, the cost of
| acquiring and constructing the Panama
| canal. not including the cost of obtaining
| new rights and concessions from the Re
| public of Colombia, will be s1s4, 222 35S The
amount remaining 10 be expended upon the
route after the appropriation OF the s57 900 :
| ment will be. In round numbers, S134 COO 600
''Shall that sum be paid from the treas
| ury from time to time the work pro-
| crosses, or shall its payment be made in
! whole or In part from the proceeds of bonds
maturing in the future?
81 do not believe that the current re-
| ceipts of the treasury should bear the en-
| tire burden Of the cost of the canal The
| canal is to be built not only for the pres
ent, but for future generations The larger
| part of the burden should be equitably dis
| gradually liquidated out OF the income of
the canal. If that should prove to be ade-
| quate, and If the income should be INSULT
! cient then III can be discharged nv future