BAIL.

See AFFIDAVIT. ARREST, 1.

1. Bail rejected, on the ground of his being one of the turnkeys of the King's Bench Prison. Daly v. Brooshoffe, M. 1 G. 4. Page 72 2. The Court will not discharge the rule for allowance of bail, on account of perjury in one of them, who had sworn on his justification, that he was a housekeeper, and a few days before, that he was not. The plaintiff's only remedy is by indictment. Shee v. Abbott, E. 2 G. 4. 321 3. The Court will not order an

exoneretur to be entered on the bail-piece, on the ground of the defendant's having obtained his certificate in Ireland; but will direct an issue, in order to ascertain the circumstances under which the original debt was contracted. Bamfield v. Anderson, E. 2 G. 4. 331 4. A continuance of notice of bail, where time was not given by the Court, need not be served before three o'clock, as specified in the rule, Michaelmas Term, 60 G. 3. Williams v. Taylor, E. 2 G. 4.

them was superseded, and ano ther issued, under which the defendants were re-appointed assignees. Four months after A. had made the payment to them, he became bankrupt on a secret act of bankruptcy previously committed by him:— Held, in an action for money had and received, brought by his assignees against the defendants in their own right, between the superseding the first commission, and issuing the second. that they were not entitled to recover; the payment made to the latter by A., being protected by the 46 Geo. 3. c. 135. s. 1., as the subsequent commission re-vested those rights in the defendants, which they believed to exist when the payment was made, and as such payment, if made to B. and Co., could not have been disturbed, if they had remained solvent. Davenport v. Carter, M. 1 G. 4. Page 16 2. A denial by a trader, to the collector of church and highway rates, who called for assessments due from him, after he had given a general order to be denied to all comers, is an act of bankruptcy; and such order is sufficient evidence of a beginning to keep house, with an intent to delay creditors; and a beginning to keep house with such intent, constitutes an act of bankruptcy, although no creditor is actually delayed thereby. Lloyd v. Heathcote, M. 1 G. 4. 3. Where the mortgagee of a bankrupt's estate called on the commissioners to direct a sale, under Lord Loughborough's order of March, 1794, and became the purchaser at such sale:-Held, that in an action for money paid, brought by the solicitors to the

129

assignees, he was liable to reimburse them the expences of advertisements, and the commissioners' fees for their attendance to perfect such sale, although the estate sold was insufficient to cover the sum originally advanced by such mortgagee. Bowles v. Perring, H. 1 & 2 G. 4.

Page 290

a

4. Where a trader ordered his servant to say, that if any creditors called, he was not at home, and he was accordingly denied, but was in bed ill at the time:-Held, that it was properly left to the Jury, whether this was a beginning to keep house with an intent to commit an act of bankruptcy, and that they were warranted in finding that it did.-Where trader committed an act of bankruptcy on the 9th November, and the sheriff took his goods in execution on the 15th, and sold them on the 21st December, and a commission was issued on the 23rd, and an assignment made on the 6th January following: Held, that the assignees might maintain trover against the sheriff, although he had sold before the assignment was made, as the bankrupt's property vested in them by such assignment, from the act of bankruptcy, by relation. Lazarus v. Waithman, E. 2 G. 4.

313

To an action of debt on bond, the defendant craved oyer, and after reciting a mortgage deed, which shewed the condition to be for payment of a sum of money on a day specified, according to the tenor of the proviso contained in the indenture, and for the performance of the covenants therein; pleaded, that there were no negative or disjunctive covenants in the indenture, and that he paid the money mentioned in the condition on the day therein specified, according to the effect thereof, and performed all the covenants and provisoes in the indenture on his part to be performed:-the plaintiff, in his replication, took issue generally on the non-payment of the money, and concluded to the country. On special demurrer, assigning for

them was superseded, and ano ther issued, under which the defendants were re-appointed assignees. Four months after A. had made the payment to them, he became bankrupt on a secret act of bankruptcy previously committed by him:— Held, in an action for money had and received, brought by his assignees against the defendants in their own right, between the superseding the first commission, and issuing the second, that they were not entitled to recover; the payment made to the latter by A., being protected by the 46 Geo. 3. c. 135. s. 1., as the subsequent commission re-vested those rights in the defendants, which they believed to exist when the payment was made, and as such payment, if måde to B. and Co., could not have been disturbed, if they had remained solvent. Davenport v. Carter, M. 1 G. 4. Page 16 2. A denial by a trader, to the collector of church and highway rates, who called for assessments due from him, after he had given a general order to be denied to all comers, is an act of bankruptcy; and such order is sufficient evidence of a beginning to keep house, with an intent to delay creditors; and a beginning to keep house with such intent, constitutes an act of bankruptcy, although no creditor is actually delayed thereby. Lloyd v. Heathcote, M. 1 G. 4. 129 3. Where the mortgagee of a bankrupt's estate called on the commissioners to direct a sale, under Lord Loughborough's order of March, 1794, and became the purchaser at such sale:-Held, that in an action for money paid, brought by the solicitors to the

assignees, he was liable to reimburse them the expences of advertisements, and the commissioners' fees for their attendance to perfect such sale, although the estate sold was insufficient to cover the sum originally advanced by such mortgagee. Bowles v. Perring, H. 1 & 2 G. 4.

Page 290 4. Where a trader ordered his servant to say, that if any creditors called, he was not at home, and he was accordingly denied, but was in bed ill at the time:-Held, that it was properly left to the Jury, whether this was a beginning to keep house with an intent to commit an act of bankruptcy, and that they were warranted in finding that it did.-Where a trader committed an act of bankruptcy on the 9th November, and the sheriff took his goods in execution on the 15th, and sold them on the 21st December, and a commission was issued on the 23rd, and an assignment made on the 6th January following:Held, that the assignees might maintain trover against the sheriff, although he had sold before the assignment was made, as the bankrupt's property vested in them by such assignment, from the act of bankruptcy, by relation. Lazarus v. Waithman, E. 313

2 G. 4.

To an action of debt on bond, the defendant craved oyer, and after reciting a mortgage deed, which shewed the condition to be for payment of a sum of money on a day specified, according to the tenor of the proviso contained in the indenture, and for the performance of the covenants therein; pleaded, that there were no negative or disjunctive covenants in the indenture, and that he paid the money mentioned in the condition on the day therein specified, according to the effect thereof, and performed all the covenants and provisoes in the indenture on his part to be performed :-the plaintiff, in his replication, took issue generally on the non-payment of the money, and concluded to the country. On special demurrer, assigning for