The State claims a preference in the assets of an insolvent bank on the basis of sovereign prerogative. Held, that the State has no preference now because the prerogative right has been abrogated: first, by the passing of a comprehensive state banking law; and second, by a constitutional provision giving bill holders of insolvent banks preference in payment over all other creditors. Fry, State Treasurer v. Equitable Trust Co., 264 Mich. 165, 249 N. W. 619 (1933). (Potter and McDonald, JJ., dissenting).