Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/883

 PROVIDENCE SAVINGS BANK V. HXINTINGTON. S71 �messengers from the depots, trains, cars, or Unes of tliesaid defendantjas the same are by this decree directed to be permitted to be enjoyed and occupied by the said plaintiflf, and from refusing to receive and transport in like manner as the said defendant is now transporting, or as it may hereafter transport, for itself or for any other express company over its Unes of railway, the express matter and messengers of the said plaintiff, and from interfering with or disturbing the business of the said plaintifE in any way or manner what- soever ; the said plaintiff paying for the services performed for it by the de- fendant monthly, as herein prescribed, at a rate not exceeding.50 per centum more than its prescribed rates for the transportation of ordinary freight, and not exceeding the rate at which it may itself transport express matter on its own account, or for any other express or other corporation, or for private individuals, reserving to«ither party the right at any time hereafter to apply to this court, according to the rules in equity proceedings, for a modification of this decree, as to the measure of compensation herein prescribed. �It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the defendant pay the couts to be taxed herein, and an execution on a fee bill issue therefor. �Geo. W. McCeary, �Circuit Judge. ���Providence Savings Bank v. Huntington and others.* Same v. Same.* �{Circuit Court, B. D. Missouri. March 9, 18S2.) �1. BTATaTE OF FbAUDS — VoLUHTABT CONTETANCES. �A vohintary conveyance is valid as to existing oreditors if it leaves snfRcient unencumbered property in the debtor's hands to satisty such creditor's claims. Smith V. Kerr, 2 Dill. 50, 20 Wall. 31. �In Eqnity. �The above-entitled causes, being of a like nature, were Consolidated for the purposes of trial. �The bills allege, in substance, that Eobert Baker, one of the de- fendants, made a voluntary conveyance of several pieces of real prop- erty, of which he was seized in fee, to his daughter Cornelia, wife of E. A. Huntington, on the twenty-second day of May, 1872; that at the time of said conveyance said Baker was indebted in large amounts to the plaintiii and others, and was "in an embarrassed condition and unable to discharge his obligations," and shortly after the date of said conveyance became insolvent, and so remained, and was insolv- ent on the twenty-ninth day of January, 1878; that on said twenty- �«Reported by B. F. Kex, Esq., of the St. Louis bar. ��� �