Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/27

20 FEDERAL REPORTER. �quantity required. In this etate of things the creditors, rep- resented by the defendant, attached ail the wheat in the wax-e- house as the property of Harris, and the plaintiffs, holding a majority of the receipts, repievied from defendant, claiming that their receipts entitled them to what was left. Can they reeover? Clearly not. When a warehouaeman, hav- ing in store a quantity of wheat deposited by several persons, for which, under the statute, he issues receipts to each de- positor, fraudulently disposes of part of the wheat, the re- ceipt holders must share in what remains according to the equitable interest of each, to be ascertained by an account- ing. No one of such receipt holders can reeover at law the whole, nor could any number of such holders, less than the whole number, reeover possession as against the remainder. This case must be brought in a court of equity, where ail the claimants can be heard and decree can be rendered estab- lishing the rights of each with respect to the property in controversy. It is a controversy which cannot be settled at law. I will, therefore, direct that a juror be withdrawn, and that either party have leave to file a bill in chancery. ���United States v. Cask of Gin, etc.* �(District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania. Ju!y 13, 1880.) �1. RBVBNXJB LaWS — DlSTELLBD SPIRITS — FaILTTIIB TO STAMP " StAND �Caskb" — FoRïEiTURE — CONSTRUCTION OF Statute. — "Stand casks " forming part of the flxtures of a retail liquor saloon, and used for holding distilled spirits, are not required to be stamped, and their contents are not liable to forfeiture under section 3289, Kev. Bt., be- cauae of the absence of such stamp. �Motion for judgment on point reserved. This was a libel of information for forfeiture against certain casks of distilled spirits found without any mark or stamp on them, and there- fore claimed by the government as forfeited under section -3289 of the Eevised Statutes. On the trial it appeared that �•Reported by Frank P. Prichard, Esq., of the Philadelphia Bar, ����