of that act.-Held, that the assignee | a sum due to him from the insolvent
might recover the proceeds of the for rent. Simmons v. Simpson, 5 Moore
sale from the judgment creditor, as & S. 177.
money had and received to the use
of the assignee after the subscribing
of the petition, under the 34th section
of that act. Gye v. Hitchcock,4 Adol.
& E. 84; S. C. 5 Nev. & M. 660.
Under section 50 of the Insolvent
Debtors' Act, an insolvent is dis-
charged from damages and costs, on
a judgment in an action of tort
signed after the filing of his petition,
if the verdict be obtained before.
Goldsmid v. Lewis, 3 Bing. N. C. 46.
S. C. 3 Scott, 369.
A prisoner in execution for damages
under 201., in an action for crim. con.,
is entitled to his discharge at the end
of a twelvemonth, under the 48 Geo.
3. c. 123., for the discharge of debtors
in execution for small debts. Good-
fellow v. Robings, 3 Bing. N. C. 1.;
S. C. 3 Scott, 319.
The assignment under the 11th
section of the Insolvent Debtors' Act,
7 Geo. 4. c. 57., vests the property of
the insolvent in his assignees only
from the time of its execution. There-
fore, where an insolvent went to
prison on the 13th April, on the 14th
sold to the defendant (his landlord)
certain fixtures on the premises he
had occupied, and on the 18th peti-
tioned for his discharge under the
act, at the same time executing the
usual assignment of his effects to the
provisional assignee :-Held, in as-
sumpsit brought by the assignees to
recover the price of the fixtures, that
the defendant was entitled to set off
A trader in insolvent circumstances,
and in prison, negociated with his
creditors for his discharge; they pro-
posed that he should execute a com-
position deed, assigning all his effects
to one of them, in trust for the bene-
fit of the creditors. He refused;
but afterwards saw a letter written
by an agent of their's to a third per-
son, saying, that they would not con-
sent to the debtor's discharge, and
that he must either execute an as-
signment, or be made a bankrupt.
Three days after reading this letter,
the insolvent, with great reluctance,
executed the assignment to the party
selected by the creditors.-Held, that
this was not a void conveyance, as
"voluntary," under section 32 of
the Insolvent Act, 7 Geo. 4. c. 57.;
and that the assignee appointed by
the Insolvent Court could not sue
the trustee for the proceeds of the
insolvent's goods, as for money had
and received to his use. Davies v.
Acocks, 5 Tyrw. 963; S. C. 2 Cromp.
M. & R. 461.
An assignment by a debtor in in-
solvent circumstances and in prison,
but before petitioning for his dis-
charge under the Insolvent Act, by
which he conveyed all his property
to a trustee for the benefit of all his
creditors, is not void, within the 7
Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 32., as a voluntary
assignment. Ibid.
Trover lies at the suit of the as-
signee of an insolvent debtor, by
virtue of the 7 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 34., | less he found that the other assignee
against any execution creditor, for a "knowingly permitted" the retainer;
sale, after the commencement of the nor was the Commissioner justified
insolvent's imprisonment, of goods in charging even the one who re-
seized before under a fi. fa. issued tained the money, unless he found
upon a warrant of attorney. Kelcey that it was culpably retained by him.
v. Minter, 1 Scott, 616.
Ex parte Benham, re Bramwell, 1
Deac. 26.
The assignment of the estate and
effects of an insolvent debtor, under
sections 11 & 19 of 7 Geo. 4. c. 57.,
vests in the assignees any copyhold
property which the insolvent may
possess, so as to enable them to
maintain ejectment for the recovery
of it. The entry on the Court Rolls
of the manor, required by section 20,
is only necessary to enable the assig-
nees to convey the property to a
purchaser. Doe d. Brenan v. Glen-
field, 1 Scott, 699.
The petitioners, who were the
factors of the bankrupt, held a large
quantity of sugars in their hands at
the time of the bankruptcy, on which
they had a lien for 41,5917. 15s. 4d.
and interest, in respect of previous
advances; they had deferred the sale
of the sugars, at the request of the
bankrupt before the bankruptcy, and
of the assignees afterwards, in ex-
pectation of a rising market; and
the sugars were eventually sold to
great advantage.-Held, that the pe-
Although the debt of a creditor
may have been inserted in the sche-titioners were entitled to apply the
dule of an insolvent debtor, the cre-
ditor may nevertheless prove the
debt under a subsequent fiat issued
against the debtor. Ex parte Fen-
wick, re Bender, 2 Mont. & A. 681.
A Commissioner finds that one of
two assignees retained in his hands a
sum of money for a certain period,
without paying it into the hands of
the bankers chosen by the creditors,
and then charges both assignees with
interest thereon at 201. per cent. per
annum, under the 6 Geo. 4. c. 16.
s. 104.-Held, that the Commis-
sioner has no right to charge both
assignees for the retainer of one, un-
proceeds of the sugars in payment of
the interest on their debt accruing
after the bankruptcy, and to prove
for the balance of the principal, with-
out any deduction being made in re-
spect of the interest so received. Ex
parte Kensington, re Lancaster, 1
Deac. 58.
The rule is the same with respect
to sales in bankruptcy, and sales under
decrees: that if the purchase money
is paid within two gale days, the pur-
chaser, without paying interest upon
it, is entitled to the rents from the
last antecedent gale day. Re French,
2 Molloy (Irish), 453.
When the amount of a dividend is
set apart and invested, under the
1 & 2 Will. 4. c. 56. s. 31., until the
decision of the Court of Review as to
a disputed debt, and the proof is sub-
sequently allowed, the creditor is not
entitled to interest. Ex parte Lewis,
2 Mont. & A. 670.
On a petition of a bankrupt to set
aside the commission, on facts lately
come to his knowledge, Lord Manners
refused to grant an issue.
In re
Perse, 2 Molloy (Irish), 441.
If a bankrupt submits to a com-
mission for a length of time, and then
disputes it, it is the practice of the
Court to refuse him an issue--but if
he applies for it before his final exa-
mination, to grant it, upon his finding
security for the costs. In re Dowling,
2 Molloy (Irish), 443.
On a petition by a bankrupt for
an issue to try the fact of bank-
ruptcy, where it appeared that the
bankrupt, four days after issuing the
commission, was discharged as an
insolvent, but the alleged act of bank-
ruptcy was prior to this discharge,
Lord Manners refused to grant an
issue; as the question could be tried
at law between the assignees under
the commission, and the assignee
under the Insolvent Act. Re Led-
witch, 2 Molloy (Irish),450.
Where an order of the Lord Chan-
cellor, for the trial of an issue at law,
directs all witnesses to be examined,
but the plaintiff declines to call some,
conceiving his case made out,-it
seems, that the judge will himself call
the others. Groom v. Chambers, 2
Mont. & A. 742.
JOINT DEBT.
And see PARTNERS.
Quare, as to the validity of a joint
commission against two of three part-
ners, on a debt jointly due from the
two. Ex parte Chambers, re Cham-
bers, 1 Deac. 197.
JOINT CREDITORS.
A., B., and C. dissolve their part-
nership, by B. retiring from the con-
cern, and assigning all his share in
the partnership stock debts to A.
and C., but no notice of such assign-
ment was given individually to the
debtors of the partnership. A. and C.
continue to carry on the trade till the
death of A. A fiat is then issued
against B. and C., as surviving part-
ners of A., when some of the debts
due to the firm of the three still
remain uncollected.-Held, that the
joint creditors of the firm of the three
could not prove against the separate
estates of B. and C.; as the outstand-
ing debts due to the three consti-
tuted joint property of that firm ex-
isting at the time of the bankruptcy.
Ex parte Leaf, re Windross, 1 Deac.
176.
By the rules of an Insurance Com-
pany, no person, except a director,
was permitted to hold more than two
shares in his own name; but no rule
prevented a person from being bene-
Joint Stock Company Shares. INDEX.
ficially entitled to more than two | petitioner; but no notice was given
shares, by holding them in the name
of another party. A proprietor, who
was already the holder of two shares,
having purchased two others, caused
hem to be entered in the name of the
bankrupt in the Company's books,
with the knowledge of one of the
directors and the actuary. The bank-
rupt signed a declaration that he
held the shares as trustee for the pro-
prietor, but no notice of the trust was
taken in the books of the Company;
and the bankrupt held the certificates
of the shares, and continued to receive
the dividends thereon, accounting for
them from time to time to the pro-
prietor, up to the period of his bank-
ruptcy, when the shares were still
standing in his name; during all which
time he was treated as owner by the
Company, had notice of meetings
served upon him, attended meetings
of the shareholders, and voted as a
shareholder.-Held, on appeal, that
this was such a secret trust, as was
not within the 79th section of the
Bankrupt Act, and that the shares
were in the order and disposition of
the bankrupt as reputed owner. Ex
parte Burbridge, re Kidder, 1 Deac.
131.
By the rules of a Joint Stock Com-
pany, only principals could become
subscribers. The petitioner pur-
chased forty shares in the name of
the bankrupt, who verbally declared
that he held them as trustee for the
petitioner, and the certificates of the
shares were kept in possession of the
to the Company of the trust, nor did
the bankrupt sign a written decla-
ration of trust until seven days be-
fore the fiat was issued.-Held, that
the shares were in the order and dis-
position of the bankrupt as reputed
owner, and passed to his assignees.
Ex parte Ord, re Ord, 1 Deac. 166;
S. C. 2 Mont. & A. 724.
A judgment at law, establishing
the validity of a commission, is not
conclusive on the Great Seal, on a
subsequent petition to supersede;
and the Court is bound to look into
all the circumstances of the case, as
affecting the requisites to support the
commission. Ex parte Chambers, re
Chambers, 1 Deac. 197.
JUDGMENT CREDITOR.
See WARRANT OF ATTORNEY.
JURISDICTION.
And see COMMISSIONERS.
The Court has no power to order
a trustee, who refuses to submit to
the jurisdiction, to convey an estate
to the assignees, which was devised
to the trustee for the absolute use of
the bankrupt's wife. Ex parte Abbot,
re Sykes, 1 Deac. 338.
The petitioner, who was an equi-
table mortgagee, discovered that the
bankrupt had made other mortgages,
and given other liens on the same pro-
perty, of which the legality of some,
and the priority of others, were dis-
There had been a sale of mort-
gaged premises under the usual order,
and the purchaser applied by petition
to be discharged, for want of title;
but Lord Manners thought, that there
ought to be a bill filed for the pur-
pose of setting aside the sale. Re
Sloane, 2 Molloy (Irish), 452.
puted by the petitioner,-who prayed | petition. Ex parte Bacon, 2 Molloy
a sale of the property, and that the
proceeds might be applied towards
the reduction of his debt, and in case
the other parties should come in and
submit to the jurisdiction of the Court,
then that the Court would settle the
respective priorities of those parties
and the petitioner.-Held, that the
Court could make no such order, un-
less those parties were regularly be-
fore the Court; and that it would be
disadvantageous to the bankrupt's" In Re Dillon, late a bankrupt,”
Lord Manners said that he had no
jurisdiction. Re Dillon, 2 Molloy
(Irish), 453. But see contrà, Ex
parte Fector, Buck, 428; Ex parte
Cowan, 3 B. & A. 123.
estate to make any order for the sale
of the property, until the interest of
the respective parties was precisely
ascertained. Under these circum-
stances, the petition was dismissed
with costs. Ex parte Bignold, re Fran-
cis, 1 Deac. 515.
Semble, that the Court of Review
has no jurisdiction in those matters
relating to the estates of bankrupts,
over which the Lord Chancellor was
accustomed to exercise jurisdiction
only by bill in equity. Quære tamen.
Ibid.
Quære, as to the jurisdiction of the
Court of Review to enforce, against a
Commissioner, the payment of the
costs of a meeting rendered neces-
sary by his default. Ex parte Hall,
re Hilton, 1 Deac. 536.
On a petition by assignees to set
aside a claim made by trustees under
a bankrupt's marriage settlement,
Lord Manners said, that if it was
fraudulent, a bill must be filed; but
that he could not set it aside upon
Where a commission had been su-
perseded, and a petition was entitled
To compel the specific perform-
ance by the assignees of an agree-
ment by the bankrupt to assign a
chose in action, a bill must be filed;
the question will not be entertained
upon petition in the bankruptcy. Re
Moseley, 2 Molloy (Irish), 454.
Trustees for the creditors of an
insolvent, taking an assignment of
"all his estate and effects," cannot be
sued for use and occupation, in re-
spect of a tenancy which was in the
insolvent, unless they so act as to
induce the landlord to believe, and he
does in consequence believe, that they
mean to become his tenants; although
they have used the premises for the
purpose of continuing the trade, and
|