LIBERTY STEAMBOAT CO. v. TURNER. SAME v. REED. SAME T. ROSSMAN. SAME v. ROBERTS at aI, (Circuit Couct of Appeals, Second Circuit. October 16, 1894.)
MAluTIME LIENS-HoME PORT-FOREIGN OWNERSHIP.
A maritime lien for necessary repairs and supplies, furnished in the port of enrollment, lIlay be enforced against a vessel owned by a corporation created by another state.
This was a libel by Henry B. Turner against the. steamer Havana, the Steamboat Company, claimants, for repairs and supplies, and Was heard, with three other libels against the same vessel for the same purpose, respectively by Andrew Reed, Jacob Rossman, and George I. Roberts and others. Decrees were rendered for the libelants in each of the cases (54 Fed. 201), from which the claimant appeals. Wm.S.Maddox, for appellant. Geo. W. Murray, for Turner. Mark Ash, fool' Reed and' Rossman. H. D. McBurney, for Roberts. Before W ALLACE,LACOMBE, and SHIPMAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. These are appeals from four decrees of the district court, Southern district of New York, sustaining maritime liens for repaivsand supplies furnished to the steamer Havana by the respective libelants. The claimant assigns as error that the Havana was in her home port when the repairs and supplies were furnished, and that they were furnished on the orders of the. owner, and not on the credit of the ves1sel. It appears that the steamer was owned by the Liberty Steamboat Company, a New Jersey corporation. It is well settled, therefore,under the apthorities, that when in New York,althpugh ellrolled there, she was in a foreign port, the residence of a corporation being the state which has incorporated it, although the individual stockholders may reside elsewhere. The Plymou.thRock, 13 Blatchf. 505, Fed.·Cas. No. 11,237. Upon an ex· aminati()ll pf tpe record on appeal and the new proofs taken in this court we co'ncur in the opinion of the ,district judge .that the several · libelant$relied upontbecredit of the vessel, and that Schrader, who ordered the repaim and supplies, was practically the master, exerall' .the of 'that office except the actual navigano:Q. of the .sbip, 'Which was in charge who.. ai. though described as master, seems in fact to have been but the pilot. The repairs and supplies were necessary to the vessel, were furnished to her in a foreign port, and, in the absence of satisfactory proof of an agreement between libelants and owner that the owner should be exclusively liable for payment, they are liens on the vessel. The several decrees are affirmed, with interest and costs.
ern DiStrict of New York..
'Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the South·
WISCONSIN MARINE & FIRE INS. CO.'S BANE; V. LEHIGH & F. COAL CO.
WISCONSIN MARINE & FIRE INS. CO.'S BANK v. LEHIGH & F. COAL CO. (MOLSON'S BANK, INTERVENER.) (Circuit Court, N. D. Illinois. November 5, 1894.)
INSOLVENT C6RPORATION-UNLAWFUL "PREFERENCE-WHAT CONSTITUTES.
The president of an insolvent corporation, whose tangible property was in the custody of the law, gave a bank the company's note, payable on demand, for a debt not dUb. Suit was commenced on it the next day. The company filed its appearance, pleaded the general issue, waived a jury, and consented to 'an Immediate hearing. Execution was Issued, and returned nulla bona, and on the same day the bank filed a creditor's bill. A director of the company was individually liable, as guarantor and otherwise, for the debt due such bank. Held an unlawful attempt to give the bank a preference over other creditors of such company. In the absence of any attack on the bona fides of the debt, and of any actual fraud in such prooeeding, such bank was entitled to share ratably with all other creditors of such company in the distribution of its assets by a reoeiver.
SAME-DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS-RIGHTS OF CREDITORS.
Bill by the Wisconsin Marine & Fire Insurance Company's Bank against the Lehigh & Franklin Coal Company, in which the Molsons' Bank intervened. Complainant demurred to the intervening petition. Demurrer overruled. O. E. More, for complainant. Weigley, Bulkley & Gray, for receiver. Peckham & Brown, for Molsons' Bank. Chas. S. Miller, for defendant. JENKINS, Circuit Judge. Treating the intervening petition as amended as proposed,-which I do not understand to be opposed, -the case stands thus: On the 17th of April, 1893, the Lehigh & Franklin Coal Company was wholly and entirely insolvent, had ceased to do business, and its property in the state of Wisconsin had during the preceding week been attached by creditors, of all of which the complainant had knowledge. The company was indebted to the complainant at that time; and on that date the president of the coal company executed a note, payable on demand, without grace, for $66,336.25, for an indebtedness not then matured. For the indebtedness to the bank one A. C. Yates, a director of the coal company, was personally and individually liable, the indebteduess being in the form of notes and drafts upon which Yates was maker, indorser, or guarantor, and was covered by a general guaranty running from Yates to the bank. The president of the coal company delivered the note to the solicitors of the coal company, who placed the same in the hands of an attorney, Mr. More, connected in business and occupying the. same office with said solicitors. On the 18th of April, Mr. More commenced suit in this court upon such note in favor of the bank against the coal company. Contemporaneously therewith the coal company filed its appearance, pleaded the general issue, filed a stipulation waiving a trial by jury and consenting to an immediate hearing, and thereupon judgment was immediately en· v.64F.no.5-32