, 1873-09-28

held tint ts could not ho done IN that caac, bccanke
dons wotli 30 giving ofoilsor unfair aavant-
Tic Ee'i bankrupt in this caso was en1od ntua!
compnny though tochnteally stock comEany' Gmt t%s
nsaed III si' aorsea oesxes ths t@o
Gull ono oint-atock company md tnc i ether e.
%%f'n SS ao ysyaSs 5 s: %
ol Of tho Company and trust fund for the ,I senoa
oi sse9rs n en o pn'g oyng onegg y f fS ss oo re-
q tho premium note a. claiming sorof .oai.a he @f
srransemcn @ stands ini!eetly na!t Of the eeI, +.
a wercaa horo tho bs receivable 1 ayo ,rn, to 10
trSiea directly a. rast OF tho e"pa' hn' "''' s'''"
VIII sss sPoGa' e ns Ea o Of he oor in tho
stgs ;' 1': :; e ;Bs '$ +:
ia; sa inf 10
sso anything aeqta0ic to enabs sno to tsko a-
Of 5 # # r. f nS1 VIII ohsrs eoa
only have rttancc, md especially when those accking
tho advantage occupied relations Of tE'tst.
opinlqn tha he plaintiff has not tho g, in Sqnity to
al OF Ills losaca the policies ngaanst hh iabiatieh
link tha obligation q who sbscrbsa '
and owes for stock IN such company yra. ns sha Us
IN for beo ct IT, Of ns ersSrs ps "n'
The otior M QUESTION III a. 10 tle equitable right Of
ecto ot ho claims under the policies agains.r IT. tho h
|
Maro tho position Of the plaintiff was unaueation.
ing Of tie parties tmny b admitted thst tho fir
at III III Of noss es
that but It il impossible to consider this part
Tie ta5 without bearing r. ming q The the
ti Ind authority to employ tho funds, % Treasurer,
obliged t lave hen nlways renay . t. ansseG ~ q
thern A Trt,stco and not m ordinary debtor OF tue
Company. 1t was the case Of nTrustee using trn,t
os asuoa a e o -
ho could meet the object Of tho truat., ., =.
h9 Tho nrs ssas9ss ss saSTf ana 1 It'd lis ssn
Iaying met With lossea Oh bis policies 10 claims tht
hanls Treasurer to answer his losses o. gcner1a
creditor ot the Company. II we ceneedo tl,la may u
au not apply to ono oceapyns the Situation Of III
plaintiff. Ho would 10 receiving tho obligations
Wo oseup9 qnnase aa
I'll There waro several difficulties in the WY q sot
of on tho special facta Of tho cnac Tho plannn WI
elected Treasurer in 1870. Whntoyor arrangement W.
made, Il at ALL prior to that timo. Tho mos. tna
2 funds in his handa, while they wcrc from time
time reported % cash or capital, drew interest, whic
noso as who sy be eIl T to
ny. There was no distinct contract made Wlta NJ
while ho wns Treasurer, which would constitute I'LL
Q the dobtor, and nothing moro, Of the company.
;. Tho plaintiff was not only tho banker Of the Con
rclations to he Company pertaining to tue Office.
In very cenr that whatever may havc been the view
tho plaintiff the Directors aud the Company diu N
rcRard tho plaintiff ns the borrower Of tho tunt
o In Ills hands, anu before ctof would 10 admss'b
l. Tho insolvency or bankruptcy Of the former the
ought to 10 satisfactory EVIDENCE tna ho as TO =
other wors that ho ha to the money, ceased to
y | tho Treasurer Of the Company.
q Wo need not refer to the question, whether II It NJ
o loan to the Treasurer by the Dirccors t. WAS w
10 iation Of law md therefore invalid. Wo Erofer
10 place It on tho ground that, Under some Of the GO
s, cele facts Of tue case tho Bcton is not mana1han
d Unless thoro is established tho simple relation
70 debtor and creditor This, wo think has not DC,
70 done and, therefore, ovcrrue tho claim OF sot-o
3, Tho original bill will 10 dismissed, and decree
bo rendered for the Assignee OIL tho cross-biu lot Il
le nmnuut due.