83e FBDSBÀIi, BBPOBTEB. �owners of the first mortgage bonds, and bring this bill, alleg- ing in substance that the defendants, as such trustees, have received from the income of the roads large sums of money, — at one time $56,000, and at another $50,000, — aftersatis- fying ail prier claims for rent; and at still other times $210,- 000 more than enough to pay the rent, which they have ap- plied to their own uses and to other purposes, and havefailed to pay over to the bondholders, to whom the money belongs. �The defendants who are representatives of Joseph Clark, deceased, have demurred to the bill because the Vermont & Canada Eailroad Company, as prior lienholder upon the funds, and the subsequent lienholdeTs are net made parties. The other defendants have pleaded the pendency of proceedings in a court of ohancery of the state to the jurisdiction of this court. The orators have set the plea down for argument, and the cause has been heard upon the demurrer and plea. �The proceedings in the court of chancery vrere brought to enforce the lien for rent, and resulted in the appointment of these trustees of the first mortgage, while so in possession, receivers to raise funds to pay o£E the rent before applying the income to these mortgage bonds. Afterwards an agree- ment was made between the parties changing the basîs of the rent, and providing for certain things to be done and specifie payments to be made, and that then the trustees should pay, first, the rent ; second, the first mortgage bonds ; third, the second mortgage bonds, and then the mortgagor; and that there should be a decree in the cauee to be binding on ail parties in interest in both roads. A decree was made ac- cordingly, founded on this consent, but which went further than the agreement, and provided also for a settlement of the accounts of the trustees and receivers by a committee of bondholders, and (on objection) by the court, and that the cause should be retained in court, with liberty to the parties to apply to the court for further orders therein as they might be advised. It was while the trustees were in possession under this arrangement that the trustees received the money sought by the orators. Afterwards they were, at their owri request, discharged from the possession of the property by an ����
