Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1903-07-17
ASK FOR FORECLOSURE
New London Northern Claims
Narrow Gauge Railroad
was Mortgaged.
The Real Facts in the Case-This
New Counter Move Will Not Affect
Action in Receivership Contest.

INOW SOuHNCI NONG VIII INOI AH6Cl
Action in Receivership Contest.
On the defensive in the Vermont
Supreme court and on the offensive in
the United States Circuit court is the
position of the New London Northern
Railroad company in its relation to the
Brattleboro & Whitehall railroad. The
latest development came to the sur.
face Tuesday afternoon, when Presi-
dent c. F. Thompson, of the Brattle.
boro & Whitehall Railroad company.
and Judge J. NJ. Tyler. the only sur
Viving trustee of the Brattleboro &
Whitehall railroad bonds, received
subpOenas to appear before the United
States court in Burlington Aug. 3. to
answer to bill of complaint en-
tered by the New London Northern
Railroad company.
This bill alleges that the New Lon
don road owns $l50,000 worth of mort.
gage bonds of the Brattleboro &
Whitehall road and that the bonds
state that a mortgage was executed to
them, that they believe a mortgage
was executed, but that neither the
mortgage or the record of it can be
found and that the bonds have become
due, but have not been paid. 1t asks
the court for leave to foreclose the
mortgage in the name of the New Lon
don Northern Railroad company un-
less the Brattleboro & Whitehall COM
pany pays the bonds.
The facts are, briefly, as follows:
When the Brattleboro & Whitehall
Railroad company contracted with
Harris Brothers to build the road an
agreement was made whereby Harris
Brothers "ere TO have a mortgage on
lne road VIII IN the contract was com.
pleted. Bonds were issued and signed
and a certain amount of them were
turned over to Harris Brothers as they
asked for them. Harris Brothers fail
ed to carry out the contract and the
road was leased to the New London
Northern Railroad company, which
took the bonds and completed the
road. The New London company put
in from s15O,OO0 to 100000 and the
Brattleboro & Whitehall stockholders
about the same amount The bonds
were issued in 1879 for 20 years and
the road was leased for 80 years.
No agreement ever was made to is
sue mortgage to the New London
railroad and no mortgage ever was is
sued. 1t is not strange. therefore. that
the New London road cannot find any
trace of one. A threat of foreclosure
was made some time ago by the Cen
trail Vermont Railway company. but
they were politely informed that they
could not foreclose a mortgage they
did not have. and nothing further was
done about it. Probably this action of
the New London road would not have
been taken had not the Brattleboro &
Whitehall road a few weeks ago al
legged mismanagement of the road. vio-
lation of the lease and made aplica-
tion to the state supreme court for the
appointment of a receiver to take
charge of the affairs of the road.
When the Brattleboro & Whitehall
road was leased to the New London
road the agreement was that the Brat
tleboro & Whitehall road should re-
ceive one-half its net earnings. but not
a dollar ever has been paid over ex-
cept $400 a year. which is a special
stipend to keep the Brattleboro &
Whitehall organization together. The
New London company claim that the
Brattleboro & Whitehall road has not
earned enough to pay its expenses, but
those connected with the road scoff at
the assertion and aver that misman-
agement and charges against the road
for expenses which it never incurred
are the only reasons why it does not
show balance on the right side.
The action of the New London road
will in no way interfere with the re.
ceivership contest as the actions are
in entirely Independent courts. The
fact that Judge Tyler and President
Thompson have been summoned to ap-
pear Aug. does not mean that hear
ing will take place then, in fact they
will not appear in person. The date
for the hearing will be fixed by Judge
II. H. Wheeler.