Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/122

 110 FEDERAL REPORTER. �him, was fraudulenl as to the stockholders and other bond- holders of the company, not parties thereto, and was made by Blair and Dodge, and their associates, for the fraudulent and collusive purpose of obtaining service of the subpœna in the foreclosure suit. And so, it is further alleged, that such service was fraudulent and collusive, and was a fraud on the ' court, and upon ail stockholders and bondholders who did not know or assent to the same, and should therefore be set aside, with ail proceedings in the foreclosure suit subsequent to the issuing of the suhpœna. It is then stated that the complain- ant, the Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, had knowledge of and coliuded with Blair and Dodge in the matter of the appointment of said Cottrill as attorney for the company, and in the service of process on him, and that the petitioner had no knowledge of any of these: alleged facts untii the seventh day of January, 1881. �Many of these allegations are made on information and belief ; but, admitting them ail to be true, the question is at once suggested, wherein consists the fraud upon the petitioner, and how is she injured. by the matters complained of ? She cannot be heard in behalf of stockholders, for theyare not here complaining. She cannot be heard in behalf of other bond- holders, for they must speak for themselves if they have been wronged. The only question is, wherein has the peti- tioner been injured or defrauded by the proceedings men- tioned? This was not the case of a fictitious action without a genuine subject-.matter to support it. Here were large mortgages given to secure bonds, the interest on which was unpaid. The genuineness of these instruments, and the validity of the debt they represented and secured, are not questioned. By the allegations of the bill in the fore- closure suit, which is part of the record, it appears that the holders and owners of jjqnds, amounting to more than one- rhalf of the entire issue under each of the mortgages, requested the trustee to institute foreclosure proceedings. This is not denied in the present pptjtion, and, if true, it was the duty of the trustee to file the bill in behalf of ail the bondholders. It could not concern bondholders how service of process on ��� �