Case Name: In re Centennial Board of Finance
Court: United States Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1891-06-29
Citations: 48 F. 350
Docket Number: 
Parties: In re Centennial Board of Finance.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 48
Pages: 350–351

Head Matter:
In re Centennial Board of Finance.
(Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.
June 29, 1891.)
Dissoeutiox or Cobpoeatiost — Division op Assets.
“A body corporate,” incorporated by act of congress, having certain specified duties to perform, and required by the act “to convert its property into cash, and to divide, after the payment of all liabilities, the remaining assets among the stockholders, will not be relieved from this duty on the ground of the smallness of the dividend or the difficulty of distribution.
In Equity.
Petition of Thomas Cochran, John S. Barbour, Frederick Fralej’', William Sellers, Clement M. Biddle, N. Parker Shortridge, James M. Robb, Edward T. Steel, John Wanamaker, Amos II. Little, Thomas H. Dudley, Edwin H. Fitter, William V. McKean, John Baird, Henry D. Welsh, W. W. Justice, Joel J. Bailey, John Cummings, John Gor-ham, Abram S. ITewitt, William L. Strong, John B. Drake, George Bain, and A. T. Goshorn, officers and directors of the Centennial Board of Finance, setting out that it had fully discharged its duties; that it had on hand two funds, one $4,960.03, the amount still unclaimed from two dividends, and a general fund, $8, 630.87. This latter fund would paya dividend of between two and three cents a share. The shares were widely scattered. Prayer that the petitioners be relieved from further custody of the fund, and that the court should appoint a suitable custodian of it, after certain payments had been made. The Centennial Board of Finance was incorporated by act of congress of June 1, 1872, as “a body corporate, to be known by the name of the ‘ Centennial Board of Finance,’” and section 10 of the act provided:
“That as soon as practicable after the said exhibition shall have been closed it shall be the duty of said corporation to convert its property into cash, and, after the payment of all its liabilities, to divide its remaining assets among its stockholders pro rata, in full satisfaction and discharge of its capital stock. And it shall be the duty of the United States Centennial Commission to supervise the closing up of the affairs of the said corporation, to audit its acceounts, and submit, in a report to the president of the United States, the financial results of the Centennial Exhibition.”
8. 8. Hollingsworth and Thos. Dudley, for petitioners.

Opinion:
Butler, J.
The petitioners are not ordinary trustees, but the officers of a corporation, with active duties to perform as such. The distribution of the moneys in their hands is provided for by the statute out of which the corporation grew. The petitioners are required to divide it among the stockholders. From the performance of this duty ive cannot relieve them. Their situation is rendered embarrassing by the circumstances stated in the petition, and we would relieve tliom if we had the power to do so, and could thus exercise it with propriety. Relief may probably be found through application to congress.