The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1913-08-16
SOUTHERN
NE. DEMURS
Contractors Damage Suit
Based on Stoppage
of Work
GRAND TRUNK SUIT
ARGUED IN COURT
Contractor Seeks Receiver
ship for the Southern
New England Road

Boston, Aug. l6.-Judge Hammond oil
the supreme judicial court yesterday
heard arguments on the demurrer of the
Southern New England Railroad Co. 10
bill in equity brought against it by
John Marsch, who seeks to establish a
claim against the company for 81 100000
arising out of an alleged breach of con-
tract.
Marsch was represented by Sherman
/. Whipple and the Southern New Eng
land by G. A. Hight.
At the close of the arguments, Judge
Hammond said that in view of the inn
portance OF the questions raised he would
reserve his decision.
Mr.. Hight pointed out what he claimed
were inconsistencies in the bill OF the
plaintiff, and contended that court of
equity could not take jurisdiction of the
allegations set out in the bill.
1t was an attempt, he said, to join
general creditors bill with another bill
brought by a single creditor of the
Southern New England to reach and APP
ply funds in the hands of other parties
belonging to the Southern New Eng
land.
Mr.. Hight called the attention of the
court to paragraph seven of the contract
entered into between Marsch and the
Southern New England company, That
paragraph reserved to the Southern New
England company the right TO suspend
the work, or any part of it, for such
length of time and as often as the COM
pany might require. Under that contract
the Southern New England had recently
ordered Marsch to resume work, but he
has refused to do so until he is paid
certain amount of money AT this point
Mr.. Whipple interrupted Mr.. Hight by
saying that the order to Marsch TO
resume work was not given until after
the federal grand jury at New York
had returned indictments against Presi-
dent Meilen of the New York, New Ha-
ven & Hartford railroad company ard
President Chamberlin of the Grand
Trunk for entering into an unlawful
traffic agreement.
In continuing his argument, Mr.. Hight
dwelt upon what he contended were IN
consisteneies in Marsch's bill, and said
II the bill was based on the ground that
Marsch had claim against the Grand
Trunk then the Grand Trunk and the
Central Vermont must be made parties
Unless these two companies were joined,
the bill as it now stood was fatally de-
fective, Mr.. Whipple claimed that the
bill before the court was that of gen
eral creditors. In addition to the claim
of Marsch for about s1,500O00, there
were others whose claims approximately
to about $2.000,000.
If Marsch were allowed through a re-
ceiver to bring suits against the Grand
Trunk and the Central Vermont roads
under their agreements to finance the
Southern New England enterprise there
would be funds sufficient to pay all cred
itors in full. The obligation of the
Grand Trunk and the Central Vermont
was in existence, although it could not
be described in exact terms. When
Marsch was invited to bid for building
the road bed of the Southern New Eng
land he was told by officials of the
Grand Trunk that that company was
behind the construction of the Southern
New England link.
Mr.. Whipple said he did not think
that either the Grand Trunk or the Cen
trail Vermont, OF both, were necessary
parties to the present bill as in case
The court should override the demurrer
md take jurisdiction of Marseh's bill. |
both the Grand Trunk and the Central
Vermont could be reached by receiver.