Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/344

 382 FSDSBaL BEPOIIIISB. �ehares of stock delivered to complainant, as set forth in bill of com- plaint herein. It also appears that said Wiltz & Co. were indebted unto said Insurance association in the sum of $20,000, with interest, and tiiat on the thirteenth of April, 1874, said association obtained judgment against said Wiltz & Co., in the fifth district court for the parish of Orleans, for said sum, but without any recognition of a lien upon said stock; that subsequently said stock was apparently sold, as set up by said association in the answer herein, but that neither the said insurance association, nor the sheriff, nor the purchaser at said sale, had possession of the certificate of said shares of stock, which always remained under the control and in the possession of complain- ant ; and that the transfer of said stock to the purchaser at said sale was made without the authority or consent of said P. S. Wiltz & Co., or of complainant. The charter and amended charter of the insur- ance Company are shown, as set forth in the answer. �The counsel in this case have gone over a good deal of ground, and have filed very able and exhaustive "hriefs on each side. The view I take of the case does away with the necessity of examining all the authorities cited. �The case arises under Louisiana law, and many of the cases cited are not in point. Stock in an incorporated company in Louisiana is property, not a credit. Smith v. Slaughter-house, 30 La. Ann. 1378. It is transferable and salable by actual contract thereto, and a deliv- ery of the certificate. Id. �It can, therefore, be pledged by contract and the delivery of the certificate. Blouin v. Hart, 30 La. Ann. 714; Factors' e Traders' Ins. Co. V. Dry Dock, 31 La, Ann. 149. When pledged in this man- ner, the pledgee takes it subject to all the liens and privileges the law puts upon it. No privilege can attach except by or under operation of law. Where the law gives no privilege, none can be given by con- tract or consent. Succession of Rousseau, 23 La, Ann. 3; Hoss v. Williams, 24 La. Ann. 568. The insurance company was formed under the general incorporation law of the state by public act passed, before a notary. It has no legislative charter. This charter could not croate any privilege unknown to the law of the state, unless the power were expressly given in the general law, which it is not. The general law authorizes corporations to "even enact statutes and regu- lations for their own government, provided such statutes and regula- tions be not contrary to the laws of the political society of which they are members." La, Civ. Code, art. 433. �But this cannot be construed to authorize a corporation by char- ��� �