28 t ’FEDEBAL REPORTER.
a new trial is granted the plaintiff after a long lapse of time [cannot
be required] to supply the same.
· So far as the court was justified in alluding to or commenting on
the evidence, it pointed in its charge sharply against the plaintiffs
claim, so far as identity depended on the exhumed skeleton. Still,
the jury reached the conclusion that the plaintiH’s husband was
killed in 1872, as alleged, and consequently that the person produced
by the defendant, and claiming to be the William Wackerle, (husband
of the plaintiff,) was not what he pretended.
The case was tried at great length, and the largest scope given to
a searching inquiry. Its novel aspects induced the court to admit _
every item of testimony which could shed light on the subject.
After full deliberation on the varied, inconsistent, and contradic-
tory evidence, the jury reached a conclusion which was their exclu-
sive province, and the court does not feel justified in interfering
therewith. The motion for a new trial is overruled.
In rc Sryrn Ins. Co.
(Circuit Oaurl, N. D. Illinois. June 14, 1882.)
B.u~umu1=ror—LrAen.rrr or- STOCKl{OLDERS—ASSE'FS.
, On January 12, 1871, a corpo1·ation, by adoption of a by-law, reduced to $500,-
000 its original stock of $10,000,000, on which 24 per cent. had been paid in by
stockholders, canceled the outstanding certificates of stock, and issued full-
paid certiticates for 20 per cent. of the canceled certificates. Afterwards the
company became insolvent, and the stockholders were resorted to in order to
pay its creditors. Held, that the stockholders, on the twelfth of January, 1871,
in case the assets of the company were not sufficient to pay its. debts, were
liable for all claims on contracts at that date in force, but were not liable on sab-
aequent contracts, and as to subsequent contracts the creditors could only look
to other assets of the company; but that if the subsequent creditors of the
company could not be paid in full out of the general assets, the stockholders
must pay infull all claims on contracts existing January 12, 1871, and refund
to the assignee anyamount realized from the assets and by him applied in pay-
ment of such contracts; and as the assignee had paid 40 per cent. on these con-
tracts out of the assets of the company, the stockholders must restore this
amount to the general fund.
J. Vain Armen and F. J. Smith, for petitioner.
B. D. Magruder and Goudy et Chandler, for defendant.
Dnumnonn, C. J. Since an opinion was given upon this case, some
4 further arguments have been presented by both sides, and the case