to the Master; or a supplemental
petition of appeal to the Lord
Chancellor from an order of the
Vice-Chancellor, where such peti-
tion is upon new grounds, which
were not brought forward by the
original petition, or by the petition
of appeal; or a petition to the Lord
Chancellor, praying only conse-
quential directions on one part
of an order made by the Vice-
Chancellor, against which no peti-
tion of appeal had been presented.
Ex parte Benson, and Ex parte
Lancaster Canal Company, re
Dilworth; Ex parte Langston, re
Hardy; Ex parte Elsee, re Joyner,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 324.

ASSIGNEES,

1. Generally, and their duties, rights,
and liabilities.

2. Appointment and choice of
3. Discharge, removal, and retiring of.

1. Generally, and their duties, rights,
and liabilities.

Assignees cannot be heard on petition

by individual creditor to stay cer-
tificate, though served with peti-
tion. Ex parte Bostock, re Wright,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 383.

A surviving assignee is liable for the
payment of dividends, if his co-
assignee ever admitted the proof
of the debt, although the creditor
has failed to apply for the divi-
dends for many years; unless it
can be proved that the creditor
has received them, the onus of the

.

on assignees by 6 Geo. 4. c. 16.
s. 104. for retaining the bankrupt's
money in their hands, the bank-
rupt himself has no legal nor equi-
table claim to, either in respect of
his allowance, or his rights to the
surplus. Pell, J. dissent. Quære.
Whether this charge is to be 201.
per cent. per annum, during the
whole period of retention, or only
one single charge of 201. per cent.
upon the gross sum retained.
Quare. Whether the charge can
be sustained on monies retained by
assignees previous to the 1st Sep-
tember 1825, when the 6 Geo. 4.
c. 16. first came into operation.
Ex parte Lowe, re Aaron, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 137. S. C. 1 Mont.
392.

Assignees applying to prove, are not
bound by the same laches as might
bind a mere individual creditor.
Ex parte Smith, re Marsh, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 267.

From the 10th to the 23d March is
a reasonable time for assignees to

elect, whether they will accept or
reject the bankrupt's lease. Ex
parte Fletcher, re Collins, 1832. 1
Dea. & Chit. 356.

One of two assignees petitioned that
his co-assignee, or the solicitor to
the commission, (one of whom had
the custody of the proceedings,)
might inrol them, pursuant to 6
Geo. 4. c. 16. s. 96. Held, that
before he petitioned for this pur-
pose, he ought first to have applied
to the co-assignee, or solicitor, to
produce the proceedings at the
office for inrolment. Ex parte
Evans, re Ford, 1832. 1 Dea. &
Chit. 353.

The Court will not order the bargain
and sale from the Commissioners
to the assignees to be given by
them to a purchaser, upon his alle-
gation merely that the bankrupt
had no other freehold property
than what was conveyed to the
purchaser under the commission.
Ex parte Pocock, re Chapman, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 104.

Where a former memorandum of
Commissioners finds that a sum of
money is in the hands of one as-
signee, and directs it to be invested
in the names of all three assignees,
which however could not be done,
as the money was not forthcoming;
the Commissioner is not warranted
in finding by a subsequent memo-
randum that the money is in the
hands of all three assignees, and

Testator by will directs his business
to be carried on by his executors,
and that when his son B. (the
bankrupt) attains 21, he should, on
performing certain terms, be ad-
mitted to a fourth share: B., at the
age of 20, enters into another busi-
nees on his own account, and never
claims the right under the will, or
performs those conditions :--Held,
nevertheless, that he had not aban-
doned the right, and therefore that
his assignees have a right to call
the executors of the will before the
Commissioner and examine them
as to the affairs of partnership.
Ex parte Marks, re Marks, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 499.

Though assignees consent to abandon
property under equitable mortgage,
yet the Court requires an affidavit
to show that such abandonment
will be for the benefit of creditors.

Ex parte Wright, re Chamberlain,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 573.

If the assignees of a bankrupt attend
meetings under a reference to
which the bankrupt was a party,
and make no objection to the pro-
ceedings, they will be consider-
ed as adopting them, and be
bound by them. Dod v. Herring.
1830. 1 Russ. & M. 153.

4. was entitled to commission for
introducing to a tradesman a pur-
chaser for his business, which was
to be paid on the completion of the
bargain. After he had introduced
the purchaser, but before the mat-
ter was settled, he became bank-
rupt, and his assignees brought an
action for the commission, which
they afterwards discontinued, and
wrote to him, saying that they dis-
claimed all right to the money.
A. upon this brought an action in
his own name :- Held, that he was
not entitled to recover. Hillary v.
Morris, 1831. 5 Car. & P. 6..

Defendant, a leaseholder, underlet to
N. and put him in possession under
an agreement to grant a lease when
N. should have paid 12007., which
he was to do by instalments in 3
years, in the mean time paying
rent at certain days to defendant,
subject to distress for non-pay-
ment. Defendant received rent
from N., but omitted to pay the
superior landlord, who distrained
on N. for arrears due from defend-

ant. N. having become bankrupt :
-Held, that the damage incurred
by this distress was a cause of
action on which his assignees might
sue. Hancock v. Caffyn, 1832. 8
Bingh. 358.

H., before his bankruptcy, hired a
carriage of M., and let it to de-
fendant; defendant sent it back to
H. damaged; M. repaired it with
the assent of H., and H. having
become bankrupt, proved the
amount due for repairs under H.'s
commission:-Held, that H.'s as-
signees had a right of action against
the defendant, although H.'s estate
paid no dividend. Porter v. Vorley,
1832. 9 Bingh. 93.

Assignees under 6 Geo. 4. c. 16. may

maintain an action for unliquidated
damages which have accrued before
the bankruptcy by non-perform-
ance of a contract. Wright v. Fair-
field, 1831. 2 B. & Ad. 727.

The 45th sec. of the statute 6 Geo. 4.
c. 16. imposes a penalty on the
provisional assignee, if he does not
deliver up the bankrupt's estate
to the ultimate assignee. The
67th section enacts, that the suit is
not to abate by the death of an
assignee, but that it may be prose-
cuted in the name of the new as-
signee; and by the 100th section,
the sum recovered for a penalty
under the act is to be divided
among the creditors. An assignee
having died, and a suggestion of

his death entered upon the record:
-Held, that the succeeding assig-
nee was entitled to proceed in a
suit which had been commenced
by his predecessor against the pro-
visional assignee for a penalty:-
Held, also, that as the assignment
to the provisional assignee was
recited in the assignment to the
second assignee, it was not incum-
bent on the plaintiff to produce it
in evidence. Bates v. Sturges,

1831. 5 Moore & P. 568.

2. Assignees, appointment and choice of.
Creditors having, subsequent to the
appointment, signed resolutions

authorizing the assignees to do
certain acts, as assignees, which
they could not have performed
without such authority, and to act
generally as assignees, are debarred
from questioning the validity of
the appointment at a subsequent
period, upon grounds of which
they were aware at the time of
signature.

Semble, also, that the appointment
is not complete till the declaration
of appointment is signed by the
Commissioner. Ex parte Nash, re
Wyatt, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 445.

The 1 & 2 Will. 4. c. 56. s. 27. does
not require the certificate of the
appointment of assignees to be
registered, in order to protect them
against subsequent purchasers of
the bankrupt's freehold property
without notice, unless the property
is situate in a register county.
Anon. 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 349.

Where there is only one assignee sur-
viving, and he, from his advanced
age (72), is desirous of being re-
moved from the office, the proper
course is to procure a new choice
in the room of those who are dead,
and then to apply that he may be
removed. Ex parte Rapp, re Smith,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 461.

On application to remove one of
several assignees the
proper course
is to petition for a new choice.
Ex parte Steel, re Steel, 1832. 1
Dea. & Chit. 488.

Semble, that a creditor who has

proved, is entitled to vote in the
choice of assignees, if he apply
before the Commissioner has signed
the declaration of appointment, al-
though the Commissioner had pre-
viously verbally declared the choice
complete. Ex parte Nash, re Wyatt,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 445.

Quare, Whether a creditor on a

voluntary bond is entitled to vote
in the choice of assignees? Ex
parte Venables, 1831. 1 Mont. 494.

3. Assignec, discharge, removal, and
retiring of.

Semble, that where one assignee had
obtained an order to discharge him-
self from the office (which was not
drawn up), but the Commissioners
had, by their memorandums, vir-
tually recognized such discharge
by excluding his name from them,
he cannot be made liable by any
subsequent memorandums. Ex
parte Learmouth, re Thompson; Ex

parte Cleaver, re Thompson, 1832.
1 Dea. & Chit. 491.

Where an assignee, on being chosen,
accepts the office, he can only
retire on payment of the costs oc-
casioned by his removal. Ex parte
Watts, re Henfrey, 1832. 1 Dea.
& Chit. 322.

Where an assignee is removed, and
another appointed, there is no need
of any assigment under the 1 & 2
Will. 4. c. 56. Ex parte Falar, re
Andrews, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 32.

Where an assignee is removed for the

benefit of the estate, he is entitled
to be reimbursed out of any fund
in hand, before it is transferred to
the new assignee. Ex parte James,
re Davis, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit.

272.

Where there is only one assignee
surviving, and he, from his ad-
vanced age (72), is desirous of
being removed from the office, the
proper course is to procure a new
choice in the room of those who
are dead, and then to apply that
he may be removed. Ex parte
Rapp, re Smith, 1832. 1 Dea. &
Chit. 461.

On application to remove one of
several assignees, the proper course
is to petition for a new choice.
Ex parte Steel, re Steel, 1832. 1
Dea. & Chit. 488.

ASSIGNEE, OFFICIAL.

See also OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE.
Where the provisional assignee is

directed to carry on the business
of the bankrupt for the benefit of
the creditors, the official assignee
will be ordered to supply him with
funds for that purpose. Ex parte
Wyatt, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 229.

By 1 & 2 Will. 4. c. 56. s. 36. the
Court has power to remove an
official assignee, as well as any
other assignee.

By section 40, the Commissioner
has a discretion to appoint, or not
to appoint, an official assignee,
where a commission issued before
that act began to operate. But
where the Commissioner appointed
one, thinking he had no discretion,
the Court will not on this ground
alone remove the official assignee.
Ex parte Ellis, re Houghton and
Watts, 1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 209.

ASSIGNEE, PROVISIONAL.
Where the provisional assignee is di-

rected to carry on the business of
the bankrupt for the benefit of the
creditors, the official assignee will
be ordered to supply him with funds
for that purpose. Ex parte Wyatt,
1832. 1 Dea. & Chit. 229.

The 45th sec. of the statute 6 Geo. 4.
c. 16. imposes a penalty on the pro-
visional assignee, if he does not
deliver up the bankrupt's estate to
the ultimate assignee. The 67th
section enacts, that the suit is not
to abate by the death of an assig-
nee, but that it may be prosecuted
in the name of the new assignee ;
and by the 100th sec. the sum re-