Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/564

 556 FEDERAL RBPOETEB. �Mariner, for complainant» �Lynde à Wcgg, for trustees. �Dyer, J. This case now cornes before the conrt upon the demurrer of the raiiroad company, and the plea of the trustees, Stewart and Abbot, to the amended bill. The dis- position of the case which, at least for the present, the court feels eonstrained to make, necessitates a statement of the history of the litigation which bas thus far proceeded in this court, touching the subject-matter of this bill; as such litiga- tion bas arisen, not only in the present suit, but in the suit previously commenced by the trustees, which is now pending in this court. In view of the fact that this case, when it came up on exceptions to the original bill, was heard by the circuit judge, and, as the parties and their counsel, upon that hearing, received from him an expression of his views, wiiich it was, at the time, supposed would give direction to further proceedings in the cause, I have felt it my duty to nonsult him with reference to the present status of the case, and the disposition which should be made of it in the shape in which it again comes before the court, and I am authorized to say that he entirely concurs in the disposition which it ia now proposed to make of the case. �On the thirty-fîrst day of December, 1875, George T. Bige- low and John A. Stewart, mortgagees and trustees in a mort- gage made by the Wisconsin Central Eailroad Company, on the first day of July, 1871, to secure an issue of bonds, filed their bill in this court against the raiiroad company and the Phillips & Colby Construction Company, in which was alleged the execution of the bonds and mortgage, the construction of a large portion of the raiiroad, and the acquisition of the title to 400,000 acres of lands, under a grant made in aid of the construction of the road, and the prayer of which bill was that the trustees might have possession of the road, lands and property described in the mortgage, and that the raiiroad company might be barred and foreclosed of and from ail equity of redemption in and to the mortgaged premises. From other allegations in the bill, it would appear that the suit was instituted as a measure m aid of the completion of the ��� �