Although the parties to the record consent to the contract as made, yet. upon consideration, we think it advisable (since the future cannot be forecast) to annex to our approval of the contract the following conditions or modifications:—

First. The rates, tolls, and compensation provided for in said contract to be paid for the use of the bridge and track by the said company, its assigns, successors, or purchasers. at the foreclosure sale under the trust deed in suit, or their assigns or successors, shall be and remain in force during the period of ten years after the completion of said bridge, and no longer, unless by the consent of parties then in interest.

Second. At the end of ton years, the tolls *920shall he fixed at rates which shall be just and reasonable for both parties then in interest, to be agreed upon every five years, and if the parties cannot agree, the question shall be a judicial one, to be determined by a competent court of equity jurisdiction, upon bill filed for that purpose.

Third. At the expiration of twenty years from the completion of the bridge, and successively at periods of five years thereafter, the company, or its assigns, or its successors, or purchasers at the foreclosure proceedings under the deed of trust now in suit, may elect to purchase said bridge, and the rights and franchises in connection therewith, and if the parties cannot agree upon the price, the same shall be determined by a court of chancery, upon bill filed for that purpose, which price shall be fixed by the chancellor, subject to appeal, at such sum as, under all the circumstances, shall then appear to be fair, just, and equitable, having reference to the profits which have been derived by the bridge company, the value of the structure and the property, and the value of the bridge franchise across the river at that time and place, and any other circumstances that will conduce to the ascertainment of an equitable result.

Fourth. The court decides nothing as to the exact situs of the bridge, but leaves that to the determination, under the laws of congress and of the state, of the parties to the contract.

The said Mitchell, Sage, and Gurney, by their counsel, thereupon claimed an appeal from the order of the court in the premises, but the court, upon consideration, decided it was not an appealable order, and refused to allow the same.