Page images



[ocr errors]

business, and instead of returning to the rules, slept at his house, and caused the shop to be closed earlier

(f) Compounding with Petitioning Creditor. than usual, and ordered bimself to be denied to the Where the bankrupt's assets in the hands of the clerk of a creditor : Held, that this was sufficient assignee are greater than the amount of his debts, evidence to constitute an act of bankruptcy; and and the creditors who have proved consent to the that it was properly left to the jury to say, whether supersedeas, and the petitioning creditor receives the the shutting up the shop at an earlier hour than whole amount of his debt, interest, and costs, it is usual, was not done as a colour to enable the party not a compounding within the 8th section of 6 Geo. to cause bimself to be denied to his creditors. 4. c. 16. Ex parte Smith, 2 G. & J. 291. Hughes v. Gilman, 3 Law J. C.P. 199, s. c. 10 B.

(C) OF THE PETITIONING CREDITON, Mo. 480, s.c. 1 C. & P. 32.

(a) Who may be. (d) Fraudulent conveyance or transfer.

A commission is not valid, where a married [See post, L.]

woman, as petitioning creditor, in respect of a debt

due to her in autre droit, strikes the dockot alone, An act of bankruptcy is committed within the without the busband joining. Ex parte Mogg, 6 meaning of the 1 Jac. 1. c. 15, by a trader convey- Law. J. Chanc. 162, s. c. 2 G. & J. $97. ing all his property to a particular creditor. Wors- To enable a secretary to a company to sile out a ley v. Demattos, 2 Ken. 218, š. c. 1 Burr. 467. commission, particular words must be used ; there

Where a lease was to become void, upon assign- fore, wbere a private statute authorized an insurance ment without the lessor's consent,-it was holden, society to sue and be sued in the name of their secrethat the lessee baving assigned all his property, tary, and to commence all actions and suits in his real and personal, to the trustee, for the benefit of name as nominal plaintiff,—It was held, tbat those bis creditors, bad not thereby forfeited the lease, words did not comprehend a petition for a commissuch deed amounting to an act of bankruptcy. Doe sion. Guthrie v. Fiske, 3 B. & C. 178, s. c. 5 D. & d. Lloyd v. Powell, 5 B. & C. 308, s. c. 8 D. & R. R. 24, 8. c. 3 Stark. 153. 35. A fair and bona fide sale of the whole of a trader's

(6) Duties and Liabilities. property is not, of itself, an act of bankruptcy.

Where a petitioning creditor, previous to issuing The party wbo impeaches the sale of the whole of a commission, bad taken out execution against the a bankrupt's property, must shew some facts from bankrupt, for part of the debt on which the commiswhich fraud may be inferred. Rose v. Haycock, 5 sion issued, the Court directed bim to fui nish the Law J. K.B. 210.

assignees with the particulars of his debt, and the Where A and B, being in embarrassed circum- time at which it was contracted. Er parte Glover, stances, conveyed to C all the machinery in their 2 G. & J. 60. mills, and all the machinery to be substituted in A petitioning creditor, under a separate commislieu thereof, to secure 3,0291. 9s. 7d., with interest, sion, will be ordered to exhibit the proceclings, in defeasible, however, upon the payment of that sum order to support a subsequent joint commission. with interest, by instalments of 501. in each succeed. Ex parte Harrison, 2 G. & J. 135. ing month, but had other property : Held, that this Where the bankrupt's assets in the hands of the was not per se an act of bankruptcy, but that it assignees are greater than the amount of lis debts should bave been left to the jury to say, whether and the creditors who have proved consent to the the conveyance was a fraudulent preference. Balme supersedeas, and the petitioning creditor receives the v. Hutton, 2 Y. & J. 101.

whole amount of bis debt, interest and costs, it is (e) Lying in Prison.

not a compounding within the 8th section of 6 Geo.

4. c. 16. Ex parte Smith, 2 G. & J. 291. To constitute an act of bankruptcy, by lying in The petitioning creditor is liable to the messenger prison for two months, the whole of the day of arrest for his charges for services before the party is demight be reckoned. Saunderson v. Gregg, 3 Stark. clared a bankrupt, although there be a due declara72. (Abbott]

tion of bankruptcy, and the messenger's billis ordered An act of bankruptcy was complete by lying in by the commissioners to be paid by the assignee out prison two months, even though the bankrupt had of the estate. Burwood v. Cant, 2 C. & P. 123. the benefit of day-rules, and was seen once at his [Abbott] own shop during that period. Soames v. Wutts, 1 C. & P. 400. (Best] [See 6 Geo. 4. c. 16. s. 5,

(c) Debt, amount and nature of. whereby lying in prison for 21 days is declared Interest cannot be added to the principal due on an act of bankruptcy.]

a bill of costs, so as to constitute a valid petitioning An escape is not constituted within 21 Jac. 1. o. creditor's debt. In re Burgess, 8 Taunt. 660, s. c. 19. s. 2, by a prisoner being carried through another 2 B. Mo. 745. county, with permission of the sheriff, and calling To prove a good petitioning creditor's debt, it must upon his attorney; hence the bankruptcy will run be shewn, that on the specific day, as much as 1001. from the day of the arrest. Buby v. Rose, 2 Ken. was due. Gresley v. Price, 2 C. & P. 48. ( Abbott] 173, s. c. 1 Burr. 437.

A good petitioning creditor's debt is not proved Quere, whether the act of bankruptcy, by lying by shewing that the bankrupt has drawn or indorsed in prison twenty-one days, under the stat. 6 đ. 4. a bill for £100, which is dishonoured, unless it apc. 16. g. 5, have relation back to the first day of the pear, that the acceptor bas made default. Giles v. imprisonment? Tucker v. Barrow, 3 C. & P. 85, Powell, 2 C. & P. 259. (Best) 8. c. 1 M. & M. 137. [Tenterden]

The petioning creditor baving given a cheque on

[blocks in formation]

bis bankers, to a person who afterwards became debt; it was held regular, though the other assigbankrupt; and such petitioning creditor being ap- nees were not joined in the affidavit. Ex parte pointed one of his assignees, and becoming possessed Blakey, 1 G. & J. 197. of his papers : Held, that the payment of the cheque In order to make a sufficient petitioning creditor's must be proved, in order to constitute the petition- debt, A and B had to join ; and in making their ing creditor's debt. Bleasby v. Crossley, 4 Law J. affidavit, upon striking the docket, the amount of C.P. 136, s. c. 3 Bing: 430, s. c. ? C. & P. 213. one of the debts was misstated : Held, that a sup

A commission may issue at the instance of a cre- plemental affidavit might be made without new ditor, whose debt has been omitted in the schedule bonds; and that it was not essential that the bond by an insolvent who had obtained his discharge. and affidavit should bear the same date. Es parte Ex parte Shuttleworth, 2 G. & J. 68.

Maughan and Smith, 1 G. & J. 565. Before application for the substitution of a new After a valid act of bankruptcy, a commission petitioning creditor's debt to support the commis- may issue at the instance of the bankrupt. Shaw v. sion, the one on wbich it was founded must be ex- Williams, 1 R. & M. 19. punged. Ex parte Chappell, 2 G. & J. 131 : S. P. In The first regular docket in the office has the re Williams, 5 Law J. Chanc. 76.

priority. Ex parte Stocker and Collins, 1 G. & J.

249. (d) When contracted.

Held, that a docket was regularly struck after A debt barred by the Statute of Limitations is the V. C. had pronounced an order for the supernot a valid debt, to support a petition for a commis- seding of a commission against the same party, on sion of bankruptcy. (But by the new Bankrupt the production of the necessary consents, but before Act, 6 Geo. 4. c. 16. S. 18, if, after adjudication the order was drawn up. Ex parte Bower, 1 G. & under a commission, the petitioning creditor's debt J. 262. be found insufficient to support the commission, the

A docket struck with an act of bankruptcy, upon Lord Chancellor, upon the petition of any creditor the belief by the creditor that an act of bankruptcy who has proved a sufficient debt, may order the bad been committed, will support a commission under commission to be proceeded in ; provided the debt a subsequent act. Ex parte Webster-Ex parte of the second petitioning creditor bas not been in. Stonehouse, 2 G. & J. 252. curred anterior to that of the first.) Gregory v. A commission of bankrupt, sued out after the Hurrill, 4 Law J. K.B. 262, s. c. 5 B. & C. 341, statute 6 Geo. 4. c. 16, came into operation, on an s. c. 8 D. & R. 270.

act of bankruptcy committed before the passing of Where a writ has been issued and continuances that statute, cannot be supported. Maggs v. Hunt, entered, the Statute of Limitations does not apply, 5 Law J. C.P. 130, s. C. 4 Bing. 212. so as to deprive the creditor of his right to issue a A statute authorizing a company to sue and besued commission of bankruptcy against his debtor. Gre- in the name of their secretary, does not empower gory v. Hurrill, 1 Law J. Č.P. 115, s. c. 1 Bing. the secretary to sue out a commission of bankruptcy 324.

as upon a debt due to himself. Guthrie v. Fiske, Where, in an action by the assignee of a bankrupt, 3 Stark. 151. [Abbott] for goods sold by the latter to the defendant before the bankruptcy, it did not appear that a petitioning

(b) Opening the Commission. creditor's debt, amounting to £100, had been con- The time for opening a commission will be entracted within six years before the suing out of the larged, where the witness, who is to prove the act commission, and the jury found a verdict for the of bankruptcy, secretes himself in concert with the assignee,-the Court refused to disturb it. Mavor bankrupt. In re Hayes, 1 G. & J. 255. v. Pyne, 4 Law J. C.P. 36, s. c. 3 Bing. 285, s. c. 2 C. & P. 91.

(c) Declaring the Bankruptcy. The petitioning creditor's debt must have arisen The advertisement of bankruptcy in the Gazette whilst the trader was in business; but the circum- will be delayed upon an affidavit made by the crestance of his discontinuing trade, does not prevent ditors for that purpose. But it will not be delayed the issuing of a commission. Doe d. Barraud v. on the application of the bankrupt. Anon. 1 Law J. Lawrence, 2 C. & P. 134. [Abbott]

Chanc. 92. Where a petitioning creditor's debt arises on a In the absence of a defect on the face of the pronote indorsed, or a bill accepted, by the bankrupt, ceedings, the Court will not suspend the advertiseevidence must be given that the indorsement or ac- ment of the bankruptcy in the Gazette. Ex parte ceptance was prior to the act of bankruptcy : the Ainsworth, 2 G. & J. 89. mere production of the instrument, bearing an earlier date, is insufficient. Cowie v. Harris, i M. & M.

(d) Errors. 141. [Tenterden]

A commission against L. H. M. of Finsbury Square, (D) OF THE COMMISSION.

in the city of London, instead of the county of Mid

dlesex, not a material misdescription. Ex parte (a) Striking the Docket.

Smith, 1 G. & J. 256. The circumstance of the affidavit of debt, on A misnomer in the bankrupt's name, in a comstriking the docket, having been sworn before the mission, may be amended before it has been prosolicitor suing out the commission, is po ground of ceeded in. 'Ex parte Harman, 2 G. & J. 25. supersedeas. In re Elford, 2 G. & J. 65.

But a description in a commission consistent with Where a commission issued on the petition of a the one in which the bankrupt carries on bis trade, solvent partner, who was one of the assignees of is sufficient, though it be not the legal description bis bankrupt co-partner, in respect of a partnership of residence. Ex parte Wride, 2 G. & J. 99.


79 Where a commissioner was misnamed in a com- proof of the trading, and of the petitioning creditor's mission, and after the bankruptcy declared, motion debt, substituted for the trial of an issue as to was made for leave to amend, the Court ordered the validity of the commission. Ex parte Hudson, the other commissioners to proceed to a new adju- 2 Russ. 456. dication. In re Barber, 2 G. & J. 81. A commission wholly omitting to describe the

(1) Effect of a Commission. bankrupt of the place where he had chiefly been The Statute of Limitations does not run against a known as a trader, is bad, though the last place of debt after a commission of bankrupt has issued. Ex trading be correctly described. Ex parte Parrey, parte Ross, 2 G. & J. 46. 2 G. & J. 225. The omission to describe the bankrupt, as of the

(8) Second Commission. place where be actually traded, is fatal. Ex parte A second commission against a bankrupt who has Beadles, 2 G. & J. 243.

not obtained his certificate under a previous sub(e) Validity of, when and how to be disputed.

sisting commission, is void at law. Hill v. Wilson,

6 Law J. K.B. 127. As to what is a fraudulent commission, see Ex One set of commissioners not being able to proparte Gane, ? G. & J. $19.

ceed, from the death of one on their list, the Court The Court allowed a general demurrer to a bill permitted another commission to issue upon the for want of equity, by the assignees of a bankrupt, same docket, directed to another list. Ex parte to restrain an action by him, to try the validity of Stead, 1 G. & J. 301. the commission. Kirkpatrick v. Dennett, 1 S. & S. Under a second commission, the writ of super408.

sedeas of the first, is sufficient proof of its having Where the parties to an alleged concert make issued. Ledbetter v. Scott, 6 Law J. C.P. 147, s. c. affidavits to support the commission, which are not 4 Bing. 623, s. c. 1 M. & P. 597. 80 satisfactory as to enable the Court to come to a After a bankrupt had not paid 15s. in the pound, conclusion, the Court will direct an issue to try the under a second commission, he became a bankrupt concert, and will direct the parties thereto to be again : Held, that the last commission was voidable, exarained at law. Ex parte Carter, 1 G. & J. S26. and not absolutely void. Todd v. Maxfield, 3 B. &

An issue, directed upon the bankrupt's petition C. 222, s. c. 5 D. & R. 258. for a supersedeas, to try the validity of a commis- In an action to try the validity of a second comsion of bankrupt, baving been found against the mission of bankruptcy, the former having been su. bankrupt, and he having submitted to the verdict, perseded, as being founded on a concerted act of and his petition having been dismissed, he will be bankruptcy, the Court refused to order the bank. restrained from afterwards bringing any action to rupt's books and papers to be produced to the assigquestion the validity of the commission. Anon. 1 nees, under the second commission, on the ground Law J. Chanc. 25.

that the application should bave been made to the A person who has obtained his discharge out of Lord Chancellor. Wilson v. Legge, 7 B. Mo. 400. custody, on the ground of bankruptcy, cannot after- Although it may appear from the depositions, wards dispute the validity of the commission in a that a prior act of bankruptcy has been committed, court of law: the commission, if objectionable, the Court will not, in the absence of evidence, premust be superseded in equity. Watson v. Wace, 5 some, that the petitioning creditor was cognizant of B. & C. 153, s. c. 7 D. & R. 633.

the fact. Thackrah v. Wood, 3 Stark, 141. [Abbott] W bere a party intends to dispute the validity of Quere- Whether the assignees under a second a commission, and brin an action inst the

commission of bankrupt, (tbe first commission person who caused it to be issued : Held, that he having been superseded) can, by petition, call the cannot require particulars of the act of bankruptcy, messenger under the first, to account for property on which such commission is to be supported. possessed and disposed of by him under the first Hughes v. Gilman, 3 Law J. C.P. 120.

commission, without bringing the assignees under No objection can be taken to the validity of a the first commission before the court ? In re Howard commission of bankrupt, unless the requisite notice & Gibbs, 1 Law J. Chanc. 31. be given, althougb the objection appears upon the

A commission directed to new commissioners, proceedings, and requires no evidence to support it. cannot issue after judgment by another list of comBevan v. Lewis, 1 Sim. 376.

missioners against the bankruptcy. Ex parte Nicholls, Where the bankrupt acquiesces, the Lord Chan. in re Summersett, 2 G. & J. 266. cellor will, opon petition, restrain bim from disputing his commission at law. Ex parte Leigh, in re

(h) Costs. Claughton, 2 G. & J. 332.

The commissioners have no right to decline to A petitioning creditor, on whose affidavit a com- tax bills of costs, on the ground that the whole mission issues, cannot afterwards dispute the valid- business of the commission is not concluded. Ex ity of the commission. Ledbetter v. Scott, 6 Law J. parte Gore, 2 G. & J. 117. C.P. 147, s. c. 4 Bing. 623. s. c. 1 M. & P. 597. At the taxation of costs, before the commissioners,

Where a commission of bankrupt is impeached the parties have a right to attend. Ex parte Palmer, by a creditor, and the debt which he claims is al- 2 G. & J. 34. leged to be usurious, it ought to be ascertained that the bankrupt is indebted to him, before the validity

(E) OF THE MESSENGER. of the commission is inquired into at his instance. Where a bankrupt has abandoned a petition for a Ez parte Hudson, 2 Russ. 456.

supersedeas, and has joined in a conveyance of part A reference to the commissioners to review the of his property, and solicited and procured the re


BANKRUPT—(Commissioners). quisite signatures to his certificate, the Court will the commissioners books and accounts relating to his restrain him from proceeding in an action against dealings with the bankrupt's estate, to produce then the messenger, impeaching the validity of the com- before the commissioners. mission. Ex parte Cutten, 1 G. & J. 317.

Semble-That the commissioners have power to The messenger, under a commission, may main- examine him, with respect to the statements and tain an action against the petitioning creditor, for entries in his books, and, in default of satisfactory his charges as messenger due before the choice of answer, to commit him. assignecs, although the party has been declared a The Great Seal cannot give the commissioners a bankrupt, and the messenger's bill has been ordered, power, which the law bas not given them; but it by the commissioners, to be paid by the assignee will lend its assistance to enforce obedience to the out of the estate. Burwood v. Kant, 2 C. & P. 123. authority given them by the statute, where they [Abbott)

have not power to punish for disobedience. Er The assignee of a bankrupt is not liable to the parte Woolley, 2 Law J. Chanc, 147, s. c. 1 G. & messenger for fees due to him before the choice of J. 395. the assignees, although he continue to employ him The allowance by the commissioners of the asafterwards. Burwood v. Felton, 2 Law J. K.B. 204, signees' accounts can only be revised by the Court 8. c. 3 B. & C. 43, s. C. 4 D. & R. 621.

as to the principle upon which they have proceeded, The messenger cannot sustain an action for his and not as to the consideration of the quantum of fees, if he was privy to a fraud in respect of wbich the allowance. Ex parte Anthony, 2 G. & J. 55. the coinmission has been superseded. Ex parte If the creditors consent to a supersedeas, and all Ruwlinsin, 3 Law J. Chanc. 54.

the commissioners, except one, are dead, the surWhere a messenger is possessed of property, viving commissioner will be directed to certify to under a commission which has been superseded ; the Lord Chancellor the names of the creditors who the Court will order him to account for the same to have proved. Ex parte Wallis, 1 G. & J. 25. the assignees under a subsequent commission. Ez Commissioners of bankrupt, under the statute parte Shaw, 2 G. & J. 73.

6 Geo. 4. c. 16. 8. S3, may issue a warrant for the The 6 Geo. 4. c. 16, authorizing magistrates to apprehension of a person who bas failed to appear grant warrants to search for the goods of a bank- before them in obedience to a summons, although rupt, in the houses of third persons, means, that the fact of service of the summons has not been the warrant is to be given to the messenger, and not verified upon oath. But in such a case they take a constable. Sly v. Stevenson, 2 C. & P. 464. [Best] upon themselves the responsibility of shewing the (F) OF THE PROVISIONAL Assignee.

fact, that the person was summoned.

The question as to the reasonableness of the notice A & Co. and B & Co. respectively carried on given by summons to a person to attend the comthe business of bankers at M. B & Co. became bank- missioners, is a question for a jury. Grocock v. rupts; and at the period of the act of bankruptcy, Cooper, 1 Law J. K.B. 265, s. c. 8 B. & C. 211, the two banks held notes and other securities of 8. c. 2 M. & R. 78. each other, to nearly the same amount. The provisional assignee of B & Co. knowing that fact, pre

(b) Duty. sented and obtained payment of the notes of A & Co. It is the duty of the commissioners to proceed in partly at their bank, and partly at their agent's the commissions as they come before them, without house in L, who did not know in what situation the reference to any other commission against the same parties stood : Held, that A & Co. might recover party: Ex parte Pryce, 2 G. & J. 161, the amount so received, against the provisional It is the duty of the commissioners, under whose assignee, in an action for money had and received. direction a sale is to be held, to ascertain the expenses Edmeuils v. Newman, 1 B. & Č. 418, s. c. 2 D. & of the sale, as directed by the general order of R. 568.

March, 1794. Ex parte Mathew, 1 G. & J. 342. Where the commissioners execute a provisional assignment, the reasons for adopting that measure

(c) Liability. ought to be stated on the proceedings. Ex parte An action of trespass does not lie against comNorris, 1 G. & J. 237.

missioners of bankrupt for committing a witness, (G) Of The COMMISSIONERS.

who does not answer to their satisfaction, when

examined by them concerning the estate and effects (a) Authority.

of a bankrupt. Doswell v. Impey, 1 Law J. K.B. Commissioners of bankrupt are not authorized by 99, s. c. 1 B. & C. 163, s. c. 2 D. & R. 350. the 5 (eo. 3. c. 30, to enlarge the time for the disclosure of the bankrupt's estates and effects, beyond

(d) Examination before. the limited period. Claughton v. Leigh, 1 Law J. Where a question is put to a bankrupt, whether K.B. 183, s. C. 1 B. & C. 652, s. c. 9 D. & R. 831. be bad not within six months prior to the commis

A bankrupt who has been apprehended under a sion, executed two conveyances of his estate and judge's warrant, may be examined by the commis. effects, or part thereof, to his son, and he answered sioners, although the time for his surrender has ex- “not to my knowledge;" it was held, that this pired ; and if the apswers given by him are satis- answer was sufficiently explicit, no further question factory, he may be discharged, unless indicted; or being put to him. Norris's case, 2 J. & W. 437. they may when necessary commit him for another examination. Ex parte Hunt, 2 J. & W. 560.

(e) Commitment by. The Court will not order a creditor, whose proof In the warrant of the commissioners committing has been admitted, and who refuses to produce to a bankrupt, the whole of the examination ought to BANKRUPT-(Proof or Debts).


be set forth, and not merely that part of it, in which the answers of the bankrupt to the questions put to him were deemed unsatisfactory. In re Tomline, 2 Law J. Chanc. 120.

If a bankrupt be committed, under a warrant of the commissioners, for not answering satisfactorily, it must set forth all the questions and all the answers. Tomlin's case, 1 G. & J. 373.

Held, that a single question, followed by a direct answer, which question is unvaried in terms, and not followed up by any further examination respecting the transaction, which has excited the suspicion of the commissioners, is not a sufficient ground to justify a commitment. Walker's case, 1 G. & J. 371.

A warrant stating that various questions had been proposed, “and among others the following" is defective. Laurence's case, 2 G. & J. 209.

A warrant is defective which refers to documents in a former examination, without setting them forth, so as to enable the judge to decide upon the same information as the commissioners possessed. Price's case, 2 G. & J. 211.

A warraut is defective which refers to, without setting out, previous examinations, and without which, the Court cannot judge of the sufficiency of what appears. Hooton's case, 2 G. & J. 215.

The omission to set out a previous examination, does not vitiate a commitment upon a distinct ground. Atkinson's case, 2 G. & J.218.

The warrant of committal of a bankrupt being by mistake dated the 2nd March instead of the end February : Held, that this is not such an error as cap be amended under the 18th section of 5 Geo. 2, c. 30. Ex purte M'Gee, 6 Mad. 206.

On a question of the legality of the commitment of a witness by commissioners of bankrupt, all the questions and answers must be looked at as forming one examination; and a witness cannot be committed for not answering as to his belief of the intention of the bankrupt, unless other parts of his examination shew such belief to be material with reference to the person, trade, dealing, or estate of the bank• rupt. Er parte Barter, 6 Law J. K.B. 124, s. c. 7 B. & C. 675, s. c. 1 M. & R. 572.

If commissioners of bankrupt order the bankrupt to be imprisoned under a warrant of commitment, for not answering a question put to him by them satisfactorily, and it does not appear on the face of such warrant, that the answer was altogether unsa. tisfactory, or that he ought to have been interrogated further, the Court will order a writ of habeas corpus to issue, to bring up the bankrupt before them. In Te Il'illment, 3 Law J. C.P. 144.

If a bankrupt be committed without any protection, a detainer may be lodged agaimst him by the assignee, between the time of applying to be reexamined and his examination. Er parte Wright, 2 G. & J. 202.

Where the last examination of a bankrupt was repeatedly adjourned, in order that he might produce a written account; and the bankrupt referred to a written account as the only mode of explaining his trade and dealings; and the last adjournment was made upon his assurance, that he would produce such account, if further time was given : Held, that such account not being produced, nor any satisfactory reason given for not producing it on the day to which the adjournment was made, the commissioners

DIGEST, 1899--18.8.

were justified in committing. Stanley Goddard's case, 1 G. & J. 45.

Where a bankrupt was, after repeated examinations, finally committed by the commissioners for not satisfactorily answering, the Court of King's Bench granted a mandamus conditionally to the commissioners to issue their warrant for a further examination, on a suggestion that the bankrupt was desirous of fully disclosing his estate and effects. In re Bromley, 3 D. & R. 310.

(1) Proceedings on habeas corpus. Notice must be given to the assignees, when a bankrupt has been committed by the commissioners, and is brought up by habeas corpus ; and notice on Saturday afternoon, for Monday, is not sufficient, unless bis right to be discharged is perfectly clear. Bromley's case, 2 J. & W. 453.

A person who is lawfully committed by commissioners of bankrupt for not giving satisfactory answers to their questions, may cause himself to be brought by habeas corpus before them, in order to his giving satisfactory answers; but he must himself bear the expense. Ex parte Baxter, 6 Law J. K.B. 369, s. c. 8 B. & C. 344, s. c. 2 M. & R. 467.

(H) PROOF of Debts.

(a) In general. Where a creditor is disabled by age and imbecility of mind from proving, by his own oath, a debt against the estate of a bankrupt, the commissioners will be directed to admit the proof upon such evidence as shall be satisfactory to them, though the debt be of considerable amount. Ex parte Clarke, 2 Russ. 575.

A petitioning creditor allowed to prove her debt, at the opening of the commission, by affidavit. Ex parte Wise, 4 Law J. Chanc. 115.

A proof cannot be made by one person on behalf of several creditors, entitled to prove, unless from necessity or by consent. Er parte the Bank of England, 2 G. & J. 363.

Although a party is not precluded from proving a debt under a commission of bankruptcy, because there is a question to be tried concerning it; yet, if a dividend be announced, its payment on that debt will be suspended. Ex parte Ackroyd, 1 G. & J. 391.

The commissioners ought not to reject the proof of a debt against the bankrupt's estate, on the ground that the creditor has received payment of part of it, under such circumstances as to render it questionable whether he ought pot to refund that payment.

The proper course is to allow the proof, but to retain the dividends upon it till the question is determined. Ex parte Ackroyd, 2 Law J. Chanc. 158.

If, after an arrest and before the return of the writ, the defendant become bankrupt, and obtain his certificate, the bail, as the bail-bond was not forfeited, are discharged, and the debt consequently proveable under the commission. Littlewood v. Crowther, 3 D. & R. 533.

A bankrupt was appointed, by his assignees, to be their agent for getting in his estate. He had had many dealings with merchants in America. After his bankruptcy, the proceeds of a ship, consigned to him before that event, came to his hands whilst acting as such agent. The Court held, that those


« PreviousContinue »