Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 20.pdf/617

 476

THE GREEN BAG

policy was a 2o-payment life. Several yearly premiums had been paid and the president had. resigned. The suit was to enjoin the directors from making further payments from the funds of the company. The company was chartered as a manufacturing corporation with the powers usually conferred for the purposes of its creation. The court after reviewing the provisions of the charter finds no expressed power to enter into such a contract, and holds that such a corpora tion has no implied, power to insure the life of its president, at least beyond the period of his con nection with the company. This decision is probably correct. The law that corporate funds can only be devoted to the operation of the business of the company which it is empowered by its charter to carry on is of course fundamental. And yet both the managers of corporations and people dealing with them have to be reminded of this law very often. A railroad cannot subscribe to an ex position project, a steel corporation cannot con tribute to campaign funds — but both of these have been done at request. The only way to support this contract is to find that it really was a business bargain for the officer's services. B. W. CORPORATIONS. (Stockholder's Liability.) Mass. — The liability of a stockholder of a cor poration which had never fully complied with the statute under which it was organized was one of the questions for determination by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in the case of Bearse v. Mabie, 84 X. E. Rep. 1015. Defend ant Mabie purchased stock from a South Dakota corporation for which it was shown he impliedly agreed to pay but had never done so. In an action brought by Bearse to enforce Mabie's statutory liability as a stockholder, Mabie con tended that he was not a stockholder because no by-law was ever adopted authorizing the issuing of shares before they were paid for. The court holds, in an opinion by Judge Loring, that notwithstanding the fact that the state could have instituted proceedings to avoid the stock because of the failure of the corporation to com ply with the law and that by the terms of the act under which the company was incorporated its complete powers come to an end on the expiration of a year for lack of proper organization, the defendant's status as a stockholder was not there by affected but that he was liable as such under the statute since parties cannot set up their failure to comply with the statutory requirements to escape the result of what they do when they

have a right to do what they do by complying with the statute. CRIMINAL LAW. (Negligence of Captain of Vessel.) U. S. C. C. A., N. Y. — The case of Van Schaick v. United States, i;g Fed. Rep. 847, is interesting on account of the facts rather than the law. It is the sequel of the dreadful holocaust known as the " Slocum disaster " in which some thing like a thousand people lost their lives by the burning of the vessel the " General Slocum" while carrying a picnic party on East River, New York, June 15, 1904. Defendant, who was master of the vessel, was convicted of man slaughter by violation of the statutes of the United States providing punishment for failure to exercise proper care in providing life preservers, means of prevention of fire, etc., and appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals. That tribunal reviews the history of the disaster and affirms the deci sion of the Circuit Court. EQUITY. (Enjoining Strikes.) U. S. C. C., 5. Y. —- The case of Delaware. Lackawanna & Western Railroad Co. v. Switchman's Union et al., 158 Fed. Rep. 541, arises out of an attempt of the plaintiff to have defendants restrained from enticing a strike. A temporary restraining order had been granted and the decision of Judge Hazel was on motion to have it continued fendente lite. It seemed that a poll of the members of defendant union had been taken favorable to a strike but that to make it effective it was necessary to have the sanction of defendant Hawley, president of the organization. The court held that the fact that he might give such consent did not consti tute such an inducement or incitement to strike as to warrant continuance of the injunction. DISCOVERY. (Inspection of Instruments.) K. Y. Sup. Ct. — In Riddle v. Blackburne, no New York Supplement, 748, the plaintiff sought to obtain a discovery of an instrument alleged to be a libel. The application was denied because it would compel defendant to furnish evidence that might be used against him in a criminal prose cution. The objection was, taken on the applica tion, and the court holds that it was properly taken then, as the opposition to the motion was the only opportunity defendant had to object to being compelled to furnish such evidence. EQUITY. (Multiplicity of Suits.) U. S. C. C. A. Ind. — In Utz v. Wolf, 159 Fed. Rep. 696, it ap peared that complainants agreed to print the names of merchants purchasing stamps in an automobile stamp directory and authorized the merchants to exchange for each directory contain ing 100 stamps a ticket entitling the holder, on the merchant's performance of the contract, to one