Blair v. St. Louis, H. & K. R. Co.

In the case of Greene against The Railroad this state of facts is presented: It appears that this gentleman held at one time, I think, $20,000 of bonds. (I may not have the figures correctly.) The indebtedness was sealed down, and new bonds were issued. He surrendered his old bonds, and received new bonds for a portion of that amount; but there was a fraction over, $500 or $600, and no bonds apparently issuing for that limited sum, he holds that claim unadjusted, or rather unsecured by a bond. The master has allowed this as a claim against the company, but holds that it is inferior to the mortgage,—this new mortgage that was created at the time the debt was scaled down. In that, we think he is mistaken; that as Mr. Greene held the amount of the original indebtedness— $20,000—as a prior and secured debt, and surrendered it for the mere purpose of having the indebtedness scaled down, he is entitled for all of the reduced obligation to come in with the present bondholders on the same standing; that although he has an amount here of $500, —not enough to make a full bond,—yet his debt in equity stands on the same footing as that of those who have received bonds. So in that respect the exception will be sustained, and the debt will be held to be of equal lien with the mortgage debt, and paid out of the proceeds of the sale, the same as the other mortgage obligations.