In re Yoder

• Decision Date: 11 February 1904
• Docket Number: 1,695.
• Citation: 127 F. 894
• Parties: In re YODER.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

127 F. 894

In re YODER.

No. 1,695.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

February 11, 1904

Henry T. Williams and Stout & Kiser, for creditors.

Swartley & Bunting, for bankrupt.

J. B McPHERSON, District Judge.

In this case the bankrupt filed an answer to the petition, averring that he is a wage earner, and therefore not liable to be adjudged an involuntary bankrupt. The Act of July 1, 1898, c 541, Sec. 4, cl. 'b,' 30 Stat. 547 (U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3423), exempts wage earners from involuntary proceedings; and section 1, cl. 27, 30 Stat. 545 (U.S. Comp St. 1901, p. 3420), defines a wage earner to be 'an individual who works for wages, salary or hire, at a rate of compensation not exceeding one thousand five hundred dollars per year. ' The referee took testimony concerning the occupation of the bankrupt, and has found the facts to be as follows:

'At the date of the execution of said deed of conveyance the said Jacob Y. Yoder resided in the borough of Perkasie, Bucks county, in said district. He was the owner of two horses, two wagons, one plow, and one cart, with which he did hauling by the day, at the rates of $3 and $4, according to the kind of work. He was not regularly employed by any one person, but hauled logs, coal, manure, etc., for different people; and the period of his employment was generally brief, lasting from a day to a week. He was also at times without work. His income varied from $9 to $15 per week, and sometimes fell as low as a dollar per week. He employed no other persons, but drove the team himself. The compensation received by him included pay for his own services and for the use of his team.'

To this finding may be added the further fact that, when he was not employed as above stated, he worked by the day at whatever manual labor he could get to do. Upon these facts, I think it is clear that the bankrupt was a wage earner, and not an independent contractor. He was a servant hired by successive masters, and was always paid by the day, never by the job. The fact that he used his horses and wagons in performing the services for which he was paid by the day does not seem to me of any special importance. A carpenter or any other skilled mechanic employs tools-- often his own tools-- to assist him in earning his daily wages; and the bankrupt's horses and wagons stand, I think, in precisely the same category. The words 'wages or hire' have so nearly the same meaning,...