been paid by said directors to themselves and certain other stockholders, to the exclusion of plaintiffs j that the property conveyed to said company, as aforesaid, consists of a leasehold occupied by the company, and a painting in the building thereon; that the lease under which said company holds provides that, if the lessee fail to pay rent for the space of 30 days after it becomes due, the lessor shall be at liberty' to declare the same forfeited, that, with the fraudulent design of having said leasehold forfeited, said directors have failed to pay the rent, and that two months' rent is now due, and the lease liable to be forfeited; that said directors have fraudulently voted that corporate notes, aggregating $3,000, be issued to them for a pretended indebtedness; that the only parties acting as officers of the company have been guilty of fraudulent acts and negligence, and for that reason the corporation is unable to appear as plaintiff, and assert the plaintiffs' rights; and that, if the directors were requested to bring an action to redress said wrongs, they would at once carry out their scheme to wreck said company before any court could interfere, and that if the property of the company is not taken out .of their hauds it will be wholly lost. Wherefore, the complainants pray (1) that a receiver be appointed to take charge of the property pending this 8uit, and receive its incomej and pay its rents, so as to prevent the forfeitureaforesaid; .(9) that the receiver require the defendants to pay the amounts due from them ,on account of their said indebtedness for paid subscriptions for stock issl1ed to them; (3) that an account be taken to 'ascertain the amount due from the defendants, and, as to what dividends have been made, and that they be made any dividends they have unlawfully made to themsi1lves j 'C4) that the defenda.nts be required to pay the plaintiffs the par value of th;e . stock held by each.of them respectively;; (5) that, at the final heariug, said defenda.nts be striotly enjoined nnd prohibited. from negotiating said notes, fraudulently issued to them, and that they be required to surrender them for cancellaticm, and that they beenjoinad frorointerferingwith the property of the company in any way until lar meeting of the stockholders thereof can elect officers who, will lawfully lilind honestly represent the interests of the corporation, and faithfully discharge their duties as such officers j and for general re. lief. , The defendants ·demur on the following grounds, viz.:. (1) That the bill does not contain any matter of equity whereon this court can grant any decree, or give to the plaintiffs any relief j (2) the plaintiffs are not entitled, upon said bill, to the relief they pray; (3) that there is a defect of parties. Smith d; Harrison and-Herman If Reyburn, for plaintiffs. Boyle, Adams If McKeighan. for defendants. TREAT, J., (orall.IJ.) In this case there is a demurrer to the bill. , 'rhe parties plaintiff, if they have any remedy under the statements
HYDE ". FREY.
in the bill, would have it against their vendors of stock, under an action of deceit. Whether. under the facts stated, any such action would lie, it is not necessary for the court to determine. The present mode of proceeding is certainly unwarranted by any principles of equity. The demurrer is sustained, and bill dismissed.
and others v.
HUSBAND AND WIFE-BUSINESS IN WIFE'S NAME-HuSBAND'S CREDITORS-
Under statutes which permit a married woman to make contracts and to do business as a/erne BOle she may avail herself of the services and agency of her husband in the conduct of her business, or management of her property, without necessarily SUbjecting it, or the profits arising therefrom, to the claims of his creditors; but an insolvent debtor may not use his wife's name as a mere device to cover and keep from his creditors the assets and profits of a mercantile business which is in truth his own.
2. EQUITY-DECREE-ALTERNATIVE ORDER-SUBJEOTING PROPERTY TO CLAIMS OF CREDITORS-INJUNCTION-RECEIVER.
In a suit to subject certain property, consisting of stock in trade and real estate, to the claims of certain creditors, after paying certain others, it appeared from the master's report that the surplus from which to pay complainants' claims would be from ten to fifteen thousand dollars, but as. taking into account the probable expense of a disposition of the property by a receiver, the court estimates the net surplus at ,7,500, it is ordered that if that sum, or the real estate (valued at $2,000 over incumbrances) and $5.500, shall be turned over or secured to complainants within 10 days. it will be deemed a discharge of complainants' demands as against the property sought to be reached, and a receiver will not be appointed; otherwise a receiver to be appointed; and in the mean time defendants are enjoined from disposing of, or lDcumbering, any of the property, except by sale at retail, at customary prices, the proceeds thereof to be deposited subject to the order of the court.
In Equity. This is a suit, by the creditors of Jacob C. Maag, to subject certain real and personal property, which is claimed by his wife, Nanc.v A. Maag, to the payment of their claims. The master has made two reports in the case,-an original and a supplemental one. The original report discloses the following facts:
Jacob C. Maag had beeu in partnership with one Louis C. Frey, under the firm name of Frey & Maag. In ]81:32, the firm failed, and disposed of all their property to one of their creditol·s. That transfer was, in a suit between the creditors of Frey & Maag, held to be fraudulent. Whether it was fraudulent on the part of Krippendorf, the assignee, is a question still pending in this court. The plaintiffs in this suit and in that are the same. By the failure, Maag became indebted to the amount of about $20.000, and has remained insolvent ever since. After failure, Maag learned of an opening for a shoe store at Evansville, Indiana. Maag knew that if he went into business again; in ,his own name his stock would be subject to attachment by his old creditors. After a consultation with his wife, who was liVing with