The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1921-10-18
FILES Demurrer
IN RAILROAD CASE
Central Vermont Says us.
Court Has No Juris-
dictiOn
DENIES SERVICE
is NOT ADEQUATE
Denies Also that West River Valley Res
ideHts VIII Turn Practically All Their
Business to Road if More Trains Are

iderits VIII Turn Practically All Their
Business to Road if More Trains Are
Run.
Counsel for the Brattleboro & White
hall Railroad Co. Attorneys A. V ID.
Piper and Judge 4. f. Cudworth, re-
ceived this morning a copy of the answer
of Attorneys John W. Redmond and Viii
liam r. McFeeters of ST. Adams, counsel
for the New London Northern Railroad
Co. to the crossbill filed by the Brattle-
boro & Whitehall Co. in the United
States court for Vermont to enforce spe-
cific performance of the agreement be-
tween the two railroads whereby the
Brattleboro & Whitehall Co. turned over
to the New London road the West River
line from Bratt1eboro to South London
, derry This agreement was the basis of
the courts order in 1905 foreclosing the
New London roads mortgage on the
Brattleboro & Whitehall Co.'S line and
the decree that the New London Co.
should always render service to properly
+ accommodate the freight and passenger
| business naturally coming to the West
River road.
The answer was to have been filed a
Z
for the New London road Judge Harland
1 b. Howe extended the time.
In the opening part the New London
road demurs, saying that United States
court has no jurisdiction as the condi-
+ tiOIlS in the decree are simply a state
ment of the statutory duty of the New
| London road as common carrier; also
! that the decree amounts to a perpetual
i receivership of the road also that at the
i time the. decree was entered the power
was then vested in the board of railroad
J commissioners to regulate all matters
/ regarding the operation of railroads in
I this state and that since then the same
right has been vested in the public serv-
! ice commission, and that jurisdiction
could not be conferred on the United
States court by agreement. -
/ 1t is asked that the crossbill be DIS
missed. but in the event that the demur-
rer is overFuled an answer is filed in
i which il is admitted that the Central
/ Vermont railroad is the operator of the
| West River branch under lease. 1t IS
denied that there has been no material
| change in the number and character of
the inhabitants and business of the West
| River valley since the decree was issued
in 1908. 1t is admitted that the Nlnhall
and Williamsville station have been
/ changed in character to prepaid stations.
/ The answer denies that the closing OF
J stations and the refusal to carry less than
carload lots of freight except on Friday
is not in compliance with the stipulation
and agreement, and it denies that if the
! Central Vermont is required to operate
the road as previously the people of the
West River valley viii reciprocate and
turn substantially all their business to
the railroad. 1t is denied that the bus
mess of the valley viii be wiped out If
the road is continued under the present
plan of operation.
4 1t is set forth in the answer that from
1898 to 1915 the West River line failed
to meet the operating expenses by an av-
erage of $4,000 a year, that in the year
1920 the deficit for the year was S10,579,
and that the deficit for the present year
will exceed last years figure. 1t is
claimed that changed conditions warrant
changed service and that the service now
given is sufficient properly TO aeconlmo-
date the freight and passenger business
naturally coming to the road
i hearing on the questions at issue
> will be held in Brattleboro, probably
: when Judge Howe can arrange to come
here.