'does  the  jurisdiction  of  a  court  of  equity  extend  tor  the  se-
questration of  the  property  of  a  corporation  by  means  of  a
receiver,  or  to  the  winding  up  of  its  affairs,  or  to  the  control
•or  restraint  of  the  usurpation  of  franchises  by  corporate
'bodies  or  by  persons  claiming,  without  right,  to  exercise  cor-
■porate  powers.^  But  it  is  thought  that  a  court  of  equity  has
a,  common  law  power  to  compel  trustees  to  execate  their
trusts,  and  may  remove  them  if  necessary.  This  is-  true  in-
dependent of  statutory  provisions.^

It  is  thought  that  it  can  in  no  instance  be  the  province  of
a  court  to  superintend  the  business  of  a  corporatiom  with  a
view  to  measure  the  degree  of  care,  industry  and  skill  to  be-
required  of,  or  exercised  by,  the  directors  or  other  officers  or
agents  of  the  corporation  ;^  and  that  a  court  will  not  interfere
to  review  or  correct  the  proceedings  of  directors  or  trustees
of  a  corporation  on  the  ground  of  fraud  or  mismanagementj
except  in  tliose  cases  where  there  is  cause  shown  for  the  dis-
placement of  the  officers  or  for  a  final  winding  up  of  the  cor-
porate affairs.  Courts  of  equity  have  no  common  law  jurist
diction  or  power  over  corporate  bodies,  for  the  purpose  of
removing  their  officers,  restraining  their  operations,  or  winding
up  their  concerns ;  but  this  power  is  given  by  statute  in  many
of  the  states  ;  and,  in  the  absence  of  such  special  legislative
grant,  the  charter  privileges  of  corporations  can  only  be  taken
by  direct  proceedings  through  the  usual  form  of  scire  facias
or  proceedings  in  the  nature  of  quo  warranto,*  regularly  pros-
«cuted  in  a  court  of  law.®

Equity  will  not  grant  relief  where  there  is  a  plain,  speedy,

1  United  States  Trust  Co.  t.  New  296  (1832)  ;  Eniskem  v.  Lutheran
Tork  W.  S.  &  B.  R.  Co.,  101  N.  Y.  Churclies,  etc.,  1  Sandf.  Oh.  (N.  T.)
478    (1886)  ;    Aliomey-General     v.       439  (1844).
