Where the receiver is authorized by the court to make contracts and to charge them upon the trust fund, the question is often presented: Can debts incurred by a receiver under order of the court displace specific prior liens upon part or all of the property held by the receiver. If the corporation is a private corporation the court cannot authorize the receiver to incur debts which shall displace existing liens unless the lien-holder consents thereto.1 So if the lien-holder objects to the authority given to the receiver to carry on business,2 or if he is not a party to the suit in which the receiver is appointed,3 his lien has priority over debts incurred by the receiver. A prior mortgage if duly recorded,4 or a vendor's lien,5 have under these circumstances been given priority over the debts incurred by the receiver. Neither his certificates,6 nor his simple contract debts,7 can be preferred to such prior liens. The court cannot authorize a receiver of a private corporation to carry on a business and incur debts which displace prior liens. Thus the court cannot so authorize the receiver to carry on the hotel business.8 This power has, however, been exercised when it is advantageous to all parties concerned to sell the business as a going concern.0 Even in case of private corporations it seems to be field that expenses incurred by the receiver in preserving the property may be given priority over pre-existing liens.10 However, if certain employees who have not been paid, threaten to burn property of which the receiver has charge, and he thereupon issues certificates for a loan with which he pays such employees, this is not an expense for preserving the property, in the proper sense of the term, since the receiver should invoke the protection of the law.11 On the other hand, if the receiver is appointed at the instance of a lien-holder, proper expenses of the receivership have priority over such lien.12 So if the lienor consents that the debts of the receivership shall have priority over his lien, effect will be given to such agreement.13 Since contracts of the receiver of a private corporation cannot affect the rights of a prior lien-holder who does not acquiesce in the receivership, it follows that such creditor cannot take advantage of such contract. So where a receiver took out insurance on certain property and collected such insurance when such property was burned, it was held that a creditor who had levied on such property and had never acquiesced in the receivership or authorized such insurance, cannot have the insurance money subjected to his claim as a prior lien thereon.14

8 State Bank v. Machine Co., 99 Va. 411; 86 Am. St. Rep. 891; 39 S. E. 141.

9 Vanderbilt v. R. R., 43 N. J. Eq. 669; 12 Atl. 188.

10 Walsh v. Raymond, 58 Conn. 251; 18 Am. St. Rep. 264; 20 Atl. 464.

"Stuart v. Boulware, 133 U. S. 78.

12 Florence, etc., Co. v. Hanby, 101 Ala. 15; 13 So. 343.

13 Tradesmen's Publishing Co. v. Car-Wheel Co., 95 Tenn. 634; 49 Am. St. Rep. 943; 31 L. R. A. 593; 32 S. W. 1097.

14 Bell v. Protective League, 163 Mass. 558; 47 Am. St. Rep. 481; 28 L. R. A. 452; 40 N. E. 857.

15 Link Belt Machinery Co. v. Hughes, 195 111. 413; 59 L. R. A. 673; 63 N. E. 186; affirming, 95 111. App. 323.

1 Doe v. Transportation Co., 78 Fed. 62; Hanna v. Trust Co., 70 Fed. 2; 30 L. R. A. 201; Fidelity, etc., Co. v. Iron Co., 68 Fed. 623; Farmers', etc., Co. v. Coal Co., 50 Fed. 481; 16 L. R. A. 603; Belknap Savings Bank v. Land Co., 28 Colo. 326; 64 Pac. 212; Lamar, etc., Co. v. Bank, 28 Colo. 344; 64 Pac. 210; International Trust Co. v. Coal Co., 27 Colo. 246; 83 Am. St. Rep. 59; 60 Pac. 621; Hooper v. Trust Co., 81 Md. 559; 29 L. R. A. 262; 32 Atl. 505; Farmers', etc., Co. v. Telegraph Co., 148 N. Y. 315; 51 Am. St. Rep. 690; 31 L. R. A. 403; 42 N. E. 707; Raht v. Attrill, 106 N. Y. 423; 60 Am. Rep. 456; 13 N. E. 282; United States Investment Corporation v. Portland Hospital, 40 Or. 523; 56 L. R. A. 627; 64 Pac. 644; 67 Pac. 194; Merriam v. Mining Co., 37 Or. 321; 56 Pac. 75; 58 Pac. 37; 60 Pac. 997.

2 Hanna v. Trust Co., 70 Fed. 2; 30 L. R. A. 201.

3 International Trust Co. v. Coal Co., 27 Colo. 246; 83 Am. St. Rep. 59; 60 Pac. 621.

4 Hanna v. Trust Co., 70 Fed. 2; 30 L. R. A. 201; Farmers', etc., Co. v. Coal Co., 50 Fed. 481; 16 L. R. A. 603; International Trust Co. v. Coal Co., 27 Colo. 246; 83 Am. St. Rep. 59; 60 Pac. 621; United States Investment Corporation v. Portland Hospital, 40 Or. 523; 56 L. R. A. 627; 64 Pac. 644; 67 Pac. 194.

5 Hooper v. Trust Co., 81 Md. 559; 29 L. R. A. 262; 32 Atl. 505.

6 Metropolitan Trust Co. v. Ry., 100 Fed. 897; Hanna v. Trust Co., 70 Fed. 2; 30 L. R. A. 201; Farmers', etc., Co. v. Coal Co., 50 Fed. 481; 16 L. R. A. 603; International Trust Co. v. Coal Co., 27 Colo. 246; 83 Am. St. Rep. 59; 60 Pac. 621; Hooper v. Trust Co., 81 Md. 559; 29 L. R. A. 262; 32 Atl. 505.

7 United States Investment Corporation v. Portland Hospital, 40 Or. 523; 56 L. R. A. 627; 64 Pac. 644; 67 Pac. 194.

8 MaKeel v. Hotchkiss, 190 111.

311; 83 Am. St. Rep. 131; 60 N. E. 524; Lane v. Hotel Co., 190 Pa. St. 230; 42 Atl. 697.

9 Knickerbocker v. Mining Co., 172 111. 535; 64 Am. St. Rep. 54; 50 N. E. 330; Ellis v. Water Co., 86 Tex. 109; 23 S. W. 858. Hotel. Cake v. Mohun, 164 U. S. 311; Thornton v. R. R., 94 Ala. 353; 10 So. 442. Manufacturing corporation. Blythe v. Gibbons, 141 Ind. 332; 35 N. E. 557; Grainger v. Paper Co., 105 Ky. 683; 49 S. W. 477.

10 Cake v. Mohun, 164 U. S. 311; Beckwith v. Carroll, 56 Ala. 12;

Makeel v. Hotchkiss, 190 111. 311; 83 Am. St. Rep. 131; 60 N. E. 524 (obiter) ; Karn v. Iron Co., 86 Va. 754; 11 S. E. 431.

11 Raht v. Attrill, 106 N. Y. 423; 60 Am. Rep. 456; 13 N E. 282.

12 Shelburn Coal Miring Co. v. Delashmutt, 21 Ind. App. 257; 52 N. E. 102; Gallagher v. Gingrich, 105 Ia. 237; 74 N. W. 763; Ellis v. Water Co., 86 Tex. 109; 23 S. W. 858.

13 Reinhard v. Investment Co., 94 Fed. 901.

14 McLaughlin v. Bank, 23 Utah 473: 54 L. R. A. 343; 63 Pac 589