April 28, 1914. The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This is the second appeal. In the first appeal this Court remanded the case to the Circuit Court for Richland county, for the appointment of a receiver.
The only matter that need be considered in the subsequent showing is that the respondent subsequently collected from other sources and paid on the debt, for which the securities were assigned as collateral, the amount of the collections. That which was alleged and not denied on the former appeal is now admitted. The Courts should not sanction the diversion of trust funds to other purposes with the hope or expectation, however well founded, that future collections will be made to supply its place. There was no material change in the showing. It was error not to have appointed a receiver, and the order refusing to appoint a receiver is reversed except as to the injunction, and the case is remanded to the Circuit Court for the appointment of a receiver and such further proceedings as may be necessary.
