The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1903-12-04

and erecting suitable buildings, and
that the money was not actually ex-
pended by the corporation. 1t seems
to me that this does not alter the APP
plication of the principle. If they OBJ
tanned a cemetery on which such
work had been done by the original
corporation, or by Wiltberger, or by
the individuals associated with him, as
was called for by the charter, they
would certainly have the right to con-
slider it proper element of value in
the property they acquired. Up to
the time of this transaction, the title
to this land and all that was upon it,
was in Wiltberger when it passed
from him and his associates, and
from them to the cemetery company.
The cemetery company acquired not
only the land, but all that had been
placed upon it by their predecessors
in title. The land, it may be said,
owed to them what they had spent
upon it to make it a suitable and
proper place for a cemetery and for
the same reason that the cemetery
company would have q right to pay
out this money itself to do the work
on the land, they would have a right
to compensate those from whom they
purchased for their outlay for the
improvements, So far as the legal
principle involved is concerned,
there is no difference be-
tween applying the proceeds
of the sale Of lots to work to be done
in ornamenting the grounds and erect
ing buildings and applying the pro-
ceeds of lots to repay those who had
already ornamented the grounds and
erected suitable buildings and who
conveyed the property to the company
with this ornamentation and buildings
upon it. If the cemetery company
had the power to raise money to orna-
ment the grounds and erect buildings.
they had the power to raise money
to compensate those who had already
ornamented the grounds and erected
buildings The difference between what
the land was worth in its natural state
and what it was worth after it was
laid out and ornamented and suitable
buildings erected upon it, is the amount
which they would have a right to raise
and expend for this purpose. 1t should
not be forgotten that these expendi-
lures for these purposes are express
ly provided for in the charter, and it
states, in express terms in the third
section, that the directors shall have
power" to do these things.
1t only. remains now to consider the
question whether or not the way in
which they chose to raise this money
was a legal way under their charter.
The essence of the arrangement that
was entered into was to obtain this
property or this money from the peo-
pie mentioned for the purposes desig-
mated, and, then to reimburse them
from the proceeds of the sale of lots
from time to time. 1t was competent
for the corporation to protect these
creditors by any legal means. It was
competent for them to have entered
into an agreement, as they did, by
which those creditors should have a
voice in the sale, in the valuation, and
in the control and the disposition of
lots, and in the protection of the
premises until the time should come
when they shall have been paid off in
full. There are many cases where
bondholders have been given a voting
power in corporations instead of a lien
upon its property i'm consideration of
an advance of money by them to the
company. There are many other cases
where they have been allowed repre-
sentation on the board of directors and
persons nominated by them were put