The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1894-02-07

"seano paid the income the receiver be author
lied Nots s to f SI nseEx S E foSi Io Fes
claim quite different from those ordinary and nns
ms bs S sSie'as
Of the court bea5S il agosggs g. G. SS IS ts sss 'f Rsp
Appellant that that @ h S can a es heps has
s f}"'aSs Es s on
there sssa that s % Gn he
road and SsnnGt be e. mad oo the
s y ss ses @
$S,: 5;ss SSys; fin 1T s:
s hs Es se edF c The pay@ent
S the bssf s pna ss do % Ut
not then %ae it my R Ss @ sas fs Rsp 5 Fa S
SCI H. ksresd = Rep It IT.
az 81
sss5 0" " road
5sfe6% ssfo8 CO. 81 W. R.
Co. er S Fea ag hsP hs rule as declared in Fodk sha
Union Trust southe S7 y Ss s
IMPOSE 15 ~s sasss
earnings have been used to pay the mortgage debt pnc
s;ss' SR s5%" % the ss2
shsnPss s mot S
T sssfss s9 F. E. s
claims and it is conceded con that IT sps nfel
has 's s5
condition appointing receiver requires the OF GER
ia' hi%S S Sssas3 aSs'Hs %a claim
be % M st. rsaSIs 1% Ss he Ssy Of not
pend whether current earnings have been used to pay he
ss tss Rep Re- ness of the
deprived the D the equity g they hey %ns now seek en to
note s5ss % t.
IT, ws m a e RG T s tsas 5 e se Court
gave poy ss f's to df claim for r'1as
seyer AND for w note had
When receiver appontd the debt evidenced by
as $ PPe6 on ns '?aS might ss
renew hepaper at maturity for the convenience
Burnham Bowen III u s. R. ,3s 1885, r. ass # was
Claims through vbe6 5
for Ss OF ~ss ds appn % s"
such expenditures lien prior to the lien Oh '"e '0f
In kHsssnd hRSs'sna EsaPsiy iss J. Pre-
fiog@ s poy ns Those few unsecured claims which by the M
g have been declared to have an equitable prior
This equitable priority" does not depend we have ssen zen
Sa Ssona Ss o appon
the they are thu the OaS%an Of IF ndpGad aed
amounts due to other connecting lines Of road for naea
and repairs unpaid ticket and freight
sopage continuance of such business relations wou pe
probable in of nonpayment" they may wen
placed category Of payments to preserve the morgase
property. ~ ,. D. uru,u.,
Miltenberger VS.. Iogansport &C., Gupra.
Not depending upon the order of the court appointing re-
ceiver nor upon the diversion of earnings but upon e
ter this priority be awarded whenever te hes
establishing the equitable character Of the claim appear to the
Chamberlain does not authorize the payment OF ts
claim corpus the order of Judge Smonton OF July H.
1888 certainly does This order he had authority to make
whenever character of the claim established Delore
him: - r 1o,ou. - s that the Receiver
WAX annontei August On October 1871 an order
was made directing the payment of traffic balances acung
fore the Receiver appointed and the order was a
Brewer j., in Blair VS.. st. Louis &c, 2d fed; TE 4no.
The appellants counsel says at page OF his or!eI
principles recognized and applied in other
ed in this very priority denied by the Court
creditors who furnished supplies and materials necessary or
the maintenance the Railroad (Fnance Co. VS. e. " ~
r. 48 Fed Rep. 5 upon the ground that they had meu
prove any diversion of the income by the bondhoder or any
other equity which could dpace the vested liens OF the oo
Finance Co. vs. c. G. & G. r. r.. 80 Fed Rep 524
None of these claims denied priority were included
within the terms of appointing Chamberlain heceixe
None of them answered the description OF sucn as were
to priority under Mltenberger LOgansport &c, anu L
vs. American &C., They not the outcome oI spe p m
sable business reaions where non-paylnent wou & S
he life OF the Company debts had been contracted ana
there appeared necessity for continuance OF the nte
business necessary to secure priority ihey y Mere
held to he ordinary creditors with no specal equ
To sustain their contention for equitable priority ney Cngn %
to show diversion of the earnings This was tner only c
fh