Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/810

 788 FEDERAL REPORTER. �Company, and that subsequently, and on orabout the fifteenth dayof June, 1873, the said claimants to said property, rights, and franchises, by an instrument of writing dated that day, signed by all the parties in interest, confirmed and ratified the said agreement of July 15, 1871. Copies of both writings are annexed to the cross-bill. An examination of the copy of the agreement, dated January 15, 1873, shows that John B. Poyntz, who was a party to the writing dated July 16, 1871, did not sign or become a party to that agr'eement. The allegation of the cross-bill must, however, control in con- sidering a demurrer to that bill. �The forty-first section of the charter otihe Kentucky & Great Eastern Eailroad Company authorized the president and directors, with the assent of the holders of a majority in value of the stock in said company, to purchase and hold any other railroad in or ont of the state. �The cross-bill, however, does not allege that the purchase of the Maysville & Big Sandy Bailroad and its property from Wadsworth and associates was made with the assent of a majority in value of the stock in the Kentucky & Great East- ern Eailroad Company, nor was there any suggestion made in the argument of counsel that such was the f act. �The amendment to its charter, approved March 29, 1872, authorized it to construct its road through the counties of Mason, Lewis, Greenup, and Boyd. It provided, however, that, previous to constructing their railroad east of Maysville, through Mason county and on through the counties of Lewis, Greeuup, and Boyd, the Kentucky & Great Eastern Eailroad Company should purchase and pay for the Maysville & Big Sandy Eailroad, or make such arrangements with its owners as should be satisfaotory to each of said owners. If it be assumed that the allegations of the cross-bill are sufiScient on demurrer to show that the company made a satisfaotory arrangement with the owners of the Maysville & Big Sandy Eailroad, the question remains whether or not the mortgage intended to convey the line east of Maysville as future-ac- quired property. �The mortgage recites that the Kentucky & Great Eastern ��� �