Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/846

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
IN RE KING.
839

the root of the tree"—meaning that it would wholly destroy the power of equity to redress the evil. He continued: "But if, upon inquiry before the master, there should appear to be a supine negligence in ail of them by which a gross complicated loss happens, I will never determine that they are not ail guilty. Nor will I ever determine that a court of equity cannot lay hold of every breach of trust, let a person be guilty of it in a private or in a public Capacity. The tribunals of the kingdom are wisely formed both of courts of law and equity, and for this reason there can be no injury but there must be a remedy in ail or some of them, and therefore I will never determine that frauds of this kind are out of the reach of courts of law or equity, for an intolerable grievance would follow from such a determination." He referred the case, in ail its complicated features, to the master to ascertain the respective liability of each director and officer, in order that each might be held liable for his own acts primarily, and afterwards the whole jointly.

I will do likewise in the present case. I will sign a decree overruling the demurrer on ail points.


In The Matter of King, Bankrupt.

In the Matter of Hyde, Bankrupt.

(District Court, S. D. New York. September 14, 1880.)

1. Bankruptcy Petition To Set Aside Deeds—Parties.—A petition to set aside the deeds of an official assignee in bankruptcy, upon the grounds of fraud and illegality, may be maintained where the rights of the petitioners have been thereby injuriously affected, although they were not parties to the banknruptcy proceedings.

2. Same—Same—Trustees and Cestui Que Trust.—Such petition can be maintained although the petitioners became trustees for the grantee, in relation to the subject of the conveyance, under title acquired prior to and independently of these deeds.

3. Same—Same—Suit Pending on Deeds.—There is no good reason, where an action has been instituted on such deeds, why the petitioners should be remitted to their def euce in that action for the purpose of showing there the invalidity of the deeds.