Case Name: In re ELK PARK MINING & MILLING CO.
Court: United States District Court for the District of Colorado
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1899-12-26
Citations: 101 F. 422
Docket Number: No. 335
Parties: In re ELK PARK MINING & MILLING CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 101
Pages: 422–423

Head Matter:
In re ELK PARK MINING & MILLING CO.
(District Court, D. Colorado.
December 26, 1899.)
No. 335.
Involuntary Bankruptcy — Corporations—Minino- Company.
A petition in involuntary bankruptcy cannot be maintained against a corporation engaged in the business of mining for previous metals; such a company not being, “engaged principally in manufacturing, trading, or mercantile pursuits,” within the meaning of Bankr. Act 1808, § 4b, and therefore not being amenable to the statute.
In Bankruptcy. This is a petition in involuntary bankruptcy against the Elk Park Hiaing & Milling Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Colorado for the purpose of operating mining property in that state. The petitioning creditors allege that the debts set forth were contracted for mining supplies furnished to the respondent, and for and on account of labor and board of men employed in and about the mining property of the company. ,
Hartzell & Steele, for petitioning creditors.
W. C. Fullerton, for respondent.

Opinion:
HALLETT, District Judge
(orally). I do not think a mining corporation can be regarded as a trading corporation, or that it is in mercantile pursuits. The mention of printing and publishing companies seems to limit the class of corporations which congress had in mind. They are manufacturing companies, in a sense, and congress thought it necessary to- enumerate them. Certainly a mining company, which is organized for operating a mine and getting precious metals from it, cannot be said to be engaged in any species of trading. I think Judge Wellborn, in calling a sanitarium a trading corporation, was wrong. In re San Gabriel Sanatorium Co. (D. C.) 95 Fed. 271. I do not see how that can be said. Judge Phillips has a better idea of the meaning of the law when he holds that an insurance company is not of that class. In re Cameron Town Mut. Fire, Lightning & Windstorm Ins. Co. (D. C.) 96 Fed. 756. lío one would think, in an ordinary discussion, of calling an insurance com pany a trading corporation, although they do a sort of business which is connected with trade, as they insure people who are engaged in trade. I am inclined to think that counsel is correct, in his position that a mining corporation is not a trading or manufacturing corporation, or one engaged in mercantile pursuits. To my mind, congress clearly intended to bring within the terms of this act those corporations which engage in the general business of buying and selling goods. A mining corporation is not of that character. I think the petition ought to be dismissed, as not coming within the terms of the act.