surrender to the assignee the property and money so received, he can not prove his claim, and must pay the costs of the proceedings by the assignee, to compel him to relinquish his preference: Forsyth v. Murtha, 7 B. R., 174.

2. When the execution creditor knew that his debtor was unable to pay his debts at maturity, he was put upon inquiry at once, and must be adjudged chargeable with the knowledge he would have thus obtained, and guilty of receiving a preference with reasonable cause to believe his debtor insolvent. The claim can not be proved until the creditor has surrendered to the assignee the advantage obtained by his judgment: Ib., 174.

HUSBAND AND WIFE.

Where, upon an agreement for a separation between husband and wife, the husband makes a settlement upon the wife, and she, through a trustee, consents to relinquish her dower, and to indemnify the husband against her debts, the deed is for a consideration valuable in law, and will be good as against creditors; but if the parties come together and set aside the articles of separation, although stipulating that the settlement shall stand, the consideration of the deed ceases to be valuable and becomes voluntary, and as against creditors will be void: Smith v. Kehr, 7 B. R., 97.

INSOLVENCY.

By insolvency, as used in the Bankrupt Act, when applied to traders and merchants, is meant inability of a party to pay his debts as they become due in the ordinary course of business: Toof v. Martin, 6 B. R., 49. (See Reasonable Cause, 2.) JUDGMENT.

1. The procuring or suffering a judgment to be obtained against him by a debtor, without giving any warrant of attorney, is not in itself an act of bankruptcy; yet, if he directly or indirectly assist or facilitate the obtaining of judgment on which an execution has followed, this may be evidence in support of an allegation that he has committed an act of bankruptcy by procuring or suffering his property to be taken in execution: In re T. Woods, 7 B. R., 126.

2. The United States District Court sitting in Bankruptcy has power to enjoin the sheriff of a State Court, or parties litigant therein, from proceeding to sell property levied upon by virtue of a writ of execution issued out of such Court upon a judgment obtained therein before proceedings in bankruptcy were commenced: In re Mallory, 6 B. R, 22.

JUDGMENT CREDITOR.

If a debtor was insolvent, or contemplated insolvency, at the time of a levy by an execution creditor, and refrained from going into voluntary bankruptcy, it was suffering property to be taken on legal process; and if he knew that he was insolvent, or contemplated insolvency, when so suffering property to be taken in execution in a manner that necessarily resulted in giving a preference to the execution creditor, then he intended such preference in judgment of law, and committed an act of bankruptcy: In re Dibble, 2 B. R., 185.

LIEN.

Where an assignee in bankruptcy applied to the U. S. District Court for leave to sell the bankrupt's real property, subject to certain specified liens, and an order was made accordingly, and after the sale the assignee reported to the court that he had sold the property free from all other liens except those named ;

Held, that a lien of a bona fide judgment creditor who was not named in any of the proceedings, was not destroyed, for the reason that the said court did not ratify such sale as "free from all liens, except those mentioned," although confirming the report of the assignee: In re McGilton et al., 7 B. R, 294

MORTGAGE.

1. Mortgages and bills of sale of personal property which are void as to creditors under the statute of frauds of the State where the transactions occur, are void and convey no title as against the assignee in bankruptcy: Edmondson v. Hyde, 7 B. R., 1.

2. If a bankrupt does not desire to assert any claim to property that is exempted from execution under the law of the State where he resides, a mortgagee of that property, can not claim it as against the assignee in bankruptcy: Ib.

PROMISSORY NOTE.

1. Any creditor may have his debtor adjudged a bankrupt, although the note which had remained unpaid for a period of fourteen days and which constitutes the act of bankruptcy, was paid before the filing of the petition, if the debtor's whole liabilities were not paid at the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings: Es3 v. Clarendon, 7 B. R., 133.

2. A secret partner, under these circumstances, THOUGH ENTIRELY SOLVENT, and having committed no other act of bankruptcy, may be adjudged a bankrupt under a petition filed against the two partners: Ib.

PARTNERSHIPS.

1. Notes drawn by one partner in the firm name, apparently in the course of partnership business, without mala fides or actual knowledge by the holder of want of authority or intended misapplication, entitle the holder to their allowance against the estate of the firm: Bush v. Crawford, 7 B. R., 299.

2. A member of a partnership offered B. for indorsement his individual notes, representing, however, that they were to be used for purposes of the firm. B. refusing to indorse the same, A. at B.'s suggestion, substituted the firm notes, which B. indorsed, and subsequently paid and became their holder.

Held, that although it appeared that the notes, after said indorsement, were used by A. to pay his separate indebtedness, and in fraud of his co-partner, B. might recover against the firm, there being no evidence of bad faith or actual knowledge by him of the intended fraud: Ib.

3. An insolvent firm made a transfer to a creditor in fraud of the provisions of the Bankrupt Act. One of the partners died, and within four months of the date of the transfer, the surviving partners, but not the firm, were adjudged bankrupts;

Held, that the assignee could not recover the property transferred by the partnership to a partnership creditor, by way of a preference, or otherwise: Withrow v. Fowler, 7 B. R., 339.

4. A petition was filed by the assignee of a bankrupt firm showing that a certain creditor, who held notes signed by the firm and by an individual member thereof, had proved his claim against the firm estate and also against that of the individual partner the petitioner praying that such creditor might be compelled to elect the estate from which he will receive his dividend.

Held, that the creditor was entitled to the advantage gained by his caution and diligence, and could receive dividends from both estates: Emery v. Canal Bank, 7 B. R., 217.

5. A note given in an individual transaction of one of the bankrupts and in no manner for the benefit of the firm, though signed in the firm name, is not provable in bankruptcy against the joint estate: Forsyth v. Murtha, 7 B. R., 175.

6. A joint individual bond of all the partners is not a claim against the partnership estate: In re Welb & Co., 2 B. R., 183.

7. A debt incurred by the members of a firm as individuals, even in a matter where

the firm is to profit, will not, in case of bankruptcy of the firm let the person to whom the debt was incurred come in for a dividend upon the assets of a firm: Forsyth v. Woods, 11 Wallace, 484.

8. A joint request made by all the individual members of a firm soliciting B. to become a surety of one of them on an administration bond does not create a liability of the firm, even though a joint representation was made to him that they intended to make the administration a matter of partnership business and profits. Hence, upon the firm being subsequently declared bankrupt, B. has no debt provable against their firm estate: Forsyth v. Woods, 5 B. R., 79.

9. Where the original consideration of a claim passed to a partnership, but the obligations given for the same were executed by all the individual members of the firm as such;

Held, that the creditor holding such obligations are the creditors of the individual members and are entitled to a credit out of the individual estates. The bankrupts elected in executing the obligations to bind their separate estates, and it can not now be insisted that the original consideration shall be inquired into: Ib.

PREFERENCE:

Preference in a bankrupt court must either rest on a lawfully acquired lien, created before the filing of a petition by or against the bankrupt, or else the consideration therefor must have been unequivocally in aid of the assignee after adjudication, or in aid of the proceedings in bankruptcy: In re Newman & Co., 7 B. R., 15;

See 6 B. R., 579.

PUBLICATION.

Where a statute requires a notice to be published once a week for four weeks, in order to a strict compliance therewith, an interval of seven days must intervene between each publication. Hence, a notice published on the 11th, 21st and 27th of January, and on the 1st and 10th of February, does not comply with the terms of the statute, and any proceedings based on such publication, must fail on account of this irregularity: King v. King, 7 B. R., 279.

POWER OF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.

The United States District Court has no power to make general rules in bankruptcy, such power being vested elsewhere; that is in the Supreme Court of the United States by section 10 of the Bankrupt Act: [See Rule 32.] Kennedy v. Macintosh, 7 B. R., 337.

RAILROADS.

1. A petition was filed in the United States Circuit Court for the Southern District of Alabama, praying that a receiver might be appointed to take charge of the property of a Railroad Company. Held, that inasmuch as the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi, and the Chancery Courts of Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee, had acquired jurisdiction, and as their powers were just as large, and they were just as competent to administer full relief, this Court will not interfere: A. & C. R. R. Co. v. Jones, 7 B. R., 145.

2. Railways fall within the designation of business or commercial corporations and are clearly within the operation of the United States Bankrupt Act of March 2, 1867: Winter v. J. M. & N. C. R. C., 7 B. R., 289.

3. A railroad company is neither a banker, broker, merchant, trader or manufacturer, or miner, within the meaning of these words as used in the Bankrupt Law, and can not be proceeded against in Bankruptcy for the mere suspension or non-payment, however long continued, of its commercial paper: Ib.

An unexecuted agreement by a company to transfer its stock can not be construed into an act of Bankruptcy: 1b.

4. The issue at par, of the stock of a company, not heretofore issued in payment of a bona fide debt, would not be a fraud on the creditors. If, however, it was owned by the company as paid up stock, lawfully acquired, the transfer thereof to creditors, under such circumstances as would give them an illegal preference, would be an act for which the company could be proceeded against, under the Bankrupt Law: Ib.

REASONABLE CAUSE.

1. A debtor is held to be insolvent when he is unable to discharge his debts in the usual course of business; hence, when creditors have accounts overdue seven or eight months, and finally have to resort to legal measures for the collection of them, they must be considered as having reasonable cause to believe their debtor insolvent; and money collected under these circumstances, must be paid to the debtor's assignee in Bankruptcy, together with interest and costs of proceedings instituted by the assignee for the recovery: Stranahan v. Gregory, 4 B. R., 142.

2. The word insolvency as used in the United States Bankrupt Act, must be construed to mean not an absolute inability to pay debts at some future time, upon settling and winding up of the party's affairs; but a present inability to pay debts mature in the ordinary course of business; although this inability to pay be not so great as to compel an absolute suspension: In re Rison, 4 B. R., 114.

3. A creditor has reasonable cause to believe a debtor, who is a trader, to be insolvent, when such a state of facts is brought to the creditor's notice respecting the affairs of the debtor as would lead a prudent business man to the conclusion that he is unable to meet his obligations as they mature in the ordinary course of business: Toof, et als, v Martin, 6 B. R., 49.

REGISTER.

1. A Register holding provisionally a Court of Bankruptcy should declare his opinion upon questions which may arise during the course of the proceedings. If exceptions be taken to his provisional decision, he should certify the question to the court: In re Reskirt, 7 B. R., 729.

2. Where an examination of a witness is ordered before a Register and the witness refuses to answer a question propounded to him. the Register should order the witness to answer. If the witness still refuses, the Register should report his contumacy to the court: Ib.

3. The Register has power to make the order under Sec. 26 of the bankrupt Act. It is not necessary to apply to the court for such order: In re Pioneer Co., 7 B. R., 250. 4. As to the scope of an examination before a Register under Sec. 26: Ib.

5. The Register in charge has power to order the assignee to furnish him with all necessary information as to funds in his hands: Clark v. Bissinger, 6 B. R., 194. SECURED CREDITOR.

Where a creditor who has security upon the bankrupt's property, has made due proof of his debt, and his proof of claim is contested, the better, if not the only proper mode of submitting the question in controversy, is to move the Court to expunge the proofs made by the secured creditor, or to apply for a re-examination of the claim under general order No. 30: Jaycox v. Green, 7 B. R., 303.

NOTES.

We regret that Book Notices have been crowded out by press of other matter from this number of the REVIEW.

We call the attention of our subscribers to the advertisement of Messrs. Kay & Brother, in the present number of this REVIEW. We particularly commend this house for the exceedingly tasty and handsome manner in which their publications are gotten up, and for their uniform courtesy and obligingness in all business transactions.

The Chicago Legal News, ably edited by Mrs. Myra Bradwell, has our heartiest wishes for its enduring success. There is no other weekly legal publication in the entire country that we consider more valuable, and we cordially recommend it to all those of our readers who wish to be constantly informed as to the course of adjudication and the state of the legal market in the Western States.

Among our exchanges there is none we welcome more gladly than the Pacific Law Reporter, published in San Francisco. It is ably edited, and full of interesting digests of the latest American decisions.

Reports of Cases in Law and Equity determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Iowa. By Edward H. Stiles, Reporter. Vol. XI. Being vol. XXXII of the

series. Published by the Reporter. Ottumwa, Iowa. 1872.

Most of our exchanges unite in bestowing very high, and, as we deem, deserved, commendation upon the execution of the Iowa Reports. The Bench and Bar will find many important principles investigated and decided in this volume, and their examination of them very greatly facilitated by the skill and care with which the Reporter presents them.

RECENT UNREPORTED STATE DECISIONS.-We have made arrangements by which hereafter the decisions of different State Supreme Courts will be digested and printed in this REVIEW long in advance of their publication in any other form. Lawyers who wish to obtain the latest legal intelligence from home and foreign sources, and who wish to keep apace with the current and progress of legal adjudication, should subscribe to the REVIEW at once. We are doing all in our power to make it an indispensibility to every practitioner and student.

The Western Jurist, published at Des Moines, Iowa, is a monthly Law Magazine of much value. Its general editor, the Hon. Chester C. Cole, is at present one of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Iowa, and a jurist of well-known culture and thought. He is assisted by Audley W. Gazzam, of New York city, whose reputation as an author of standard law works on Bankruptcy, is known to all practitioners in this country. The Hon. E. H. Stiles, the present able Reporter of the Supreme Court of Iowa, is also among the number of its editors. We commend it to our readers as well worthy their patronage.

VOL. II.-NO. II-14*