Sales in Bankruptcy, see Bankruptcy, 319. Confiscation of, see Confiscation and Seques- Loan of, by County, see Counties, 19. Presumptions and Burden of Proof, see Evi- Evidence of Commercial Rating of Accused, Notice of, to Guarantor, see Guaranty, IV. Obligation of Married Woman to Pay for Property Purchased on, see Husband For Insurance Premium, see Insurance, 140, Maritime Lien for Repairs and Supplies Furnished on, see Maritime Liens, II. b. To Partners on Accounting, see Partnership, Passing Credits as Payment, see Payment, Selling Postage Stamps on, see Postoffice, Loan of, by County or Municipality to Aid To Officer in Suit by Government, see Set- Presumption and Burden of Proof, see Evi- Answer as Evidence, see Evidence, 1321, Right to Attack Judgment upon, see Judg. Collateral Attack on Prior Decree, see Judg Limitation of Action against, see Limitation Remedy against Successor of Municipal Cor- poration, see Municipal Corporations, By Administrator as Representative of Joinder of Parties to, see Parties, 98. Necessary Partie to, see Parties, 172, 173, Sufficiency of Allegations in, see Pleading, Admission in Answer to, see Pleading, 128. Multifariousness in, see Pleading, 278, 293. Removal of, to Federal Court, see Removal Against City for Claims Payable from Effect of Bankruptcy of Debtor, see Bank- Effect of Bringing in New Parties to De- stroy Diversity of Citizenship, see Power of Federal Equity Courts to Enforce Rights of Creditors under Louisiana Amount in Controversy on Bill to Reach Priority of Jurisdiction and Lien Attaching to Bill First Filed, see Courts, 1539. Necessity of Bringing in Equity in Federal General Jurisdiction and Principles of 1. In a jurisdiction where the systems of common law and chancery both prevail, chancery only can give relief on a creditors' 2. The jurisdiction of a court of equity to reach the property of a debtor justly ap VI. Decree; Proceeds and Distribution, plicable to the payment of his debts, even Costs on, see Costs and Fees, 38. Cited in Shainwald v. Lewis, 7 Sawy. 156, 6 Continental Nat. Bank v. Heilman, 81 Fed. | sionary interest, but collectible only out of 42-Continental Nat. Bank v. Heilman, 30 the rents and profits of the property, which C. C. A. 235, 58 U. S. App. 475, 86 Fed. 516 are insufficient to produce any surplus for -Ex parte Hardy, 68 Ala. 340-Morton v. Graffin, 68 Md. 562, 13 Atl. 341-Paddock application to the judgment, a court of Hawley Iron Co. v. McDonald, 61 Mo. App. equity may decree a sale of the reversionary 567, 1 S. W. 412. interest, with a view to accelerate the payment. Burton v. Smith, 13 Pet. 464, Cited in Gilbert v. Lynch, 17 Blatchf. 406, 1 Fed. 115-Goff v. Kelly, 74 Fed. 331-Bickford v. McComb, 88 Fed. 433-Hughes v. Newton, 32 C. C. A. 194, 60 U. S. App. 602. 89 Fed. 215-Bedford Quarries Co. v. Thomlinson, 36 C. C. A. 275, 95 Fed. 211-ale v. Coffin, 114 Fed. 581-Collamore v. Wilder, 19 Kan. 80-Pearce v. Calhoun, 59 Mo. 275 --French v. Stratton, 79 Mo. 562-Bennett v. Bennett, 63 N. J. Eq. 309, 49 Atl. 501Stanton v. Catron, 8 N. M. 363, 45 Pac. 884 -Landreth v. Schevenel, 102 Tenn. 494, 52 S. W. 148-Winter v. Winter, 101 Wis. 497, 77 N. W. 883. 10: 248 Distinguished in Lisle v. Cheney, 36 Kan. 585, 13 Pac. 816. Cited in Fowler v. Rapley, 15 Wall. 336, 21 L. ed. 37-Beall v. White, 94 U. S. 386, 24 L. ed. 175-Mansony v. United States Bank, 4 Ala. 750-Real Estate Bank v. Watson, 13 Ark. 80-McLane v. Placerville & S. Valley R. Co. 66 Cal. 631, 6 Pac. 748-Bryan v. May, 9 App. D. C. 389-First Nat. Bank v. Morsell, 1 MacArth. 159-Wiggin v. Heywood, 118 Mass. 517-Ashton v. Slater, 19 Minn. 350, Gil. 300-Dawley v. Brown, 65 Barb. 122-Lawrence v. Belger, 31 Ohio St. 181-Draper v. Barnes, 12 R. I. 162-Price v. Planters Nat. Bank, 92 Va. 481, 32 L.R. A. 219, 23 S. E. 887-Arzbacher v. Mayer, 53 Wis. 388, 10 N. W. 440-Gilbert v. Stockman, 81 Wis. 607, 29 Am. St. Rep. 922, 51 N. W. 1076. 7. A creditors' bill will lie against the administrator of a deceased judgment debtor and a third person to whom it is alleged the debtor fraudulently conveyed assets, although the lien of the judgment may have expired. Hagan v. Walker, 14 How. 29, 14:312 Distinguished in Stewart v. National Union Bank, 2 Abb. (U. S.) 432, Fed. Cas. No. 13,435. Cited in Cox v. Wall, 2 N. B. N. Rep. 575, 99 4. It is within the general jurisdiction of a court of chancery to assist a judgment 8. Where a bankrupt, having concealed creditor to reach, and apply to the payment from his assignee a valuable claim belongof his debt, any property of the judgment ing to his estate, afterwards purchased it debtor which, by reason of its nature only, for a nominal sum, together with his other and not by reason of any positive rule ex-property, at an auction sale thereof, having empting it from liability for debt, cannot be taken on execution at law. Ager v. Murray, 105 U. S. 126, 26: 942 Cited in Sparhawk v. Yerkes, 142 U. S. 12, 35 L. ed. 917, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 104-Hunting the title conveyed to a third person, by whom it was conveyed to the bankrupt, it was held that a creditor's bill brought by a creditor, in behalf of all creditors, after the assignee's death, would lie to reach a ton v. Jones, 72 Conn. 49, 43 Atl. 564-Petefish v. Buck, 56 Ill. App. 153-Powers v. fund awarded in payment of the claim. Raymond, 137 Mass. 484-McCann v. Ran-Clark v. Clark, 17 How. 315, 15: 77 dall, 147 Mass. 98, 9 Am. St. Rep. 666, 17 N. E. 75--Pettibone v. Toledo, C. & St. L. R. Co. 148 Mass. 418, 1 L.R.A. 793, 19 N. E. 337-Geist V. St. Louis, 156 Mo. 649, 79 Am. St. Rep. 545, 57 S. W. 766-Stevenson Arlington State Bank v. Paulsen, 57 Neb. v. McFarland, 162 Mo. 169, 62 S. W. 695 735, 78 N. W. 303. 5. A creditors' bill may be brought under the chancery practice act of Illinois, not only where a technical discovery is sought, but in all cases where the creditor or his representative is obliged, by the nature of the interest sought to be reached, to resort to a court of equity for relief, as where the property is in the hands of trustees, and the creditor consequently has no lien and can acquire none at law. Spindle v. Shreve, 111 U. S. 542, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 522, 28: 512 Cited in Brandies v. Cochrane, 112 U. S. 350, 28 L. ed. 763, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 194. 6. Where a judgment is a lien on a rever 9. Although, under the laws of Maryland, judgments at law are not liens upon the lands of judgment debtors, previously conveyed to a trustee in trust for the payment of debts, yet a judgment creditor of such debtor may file his bill in equity to take an account of the debts secured by the trust deed, and, subject thereto, to have the premises sold, and the proceeds applied to the satisfaction of his judgment, and is entitled to have his judgment first satisfied out of such proceeds, in preference to other creditors. Freedman's Sav. & T. Co. v. Earle, 110 U. S. 710, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 126. 28: 301 Cited in Brandies v. Cochrane, 112 U. S. 350, 28 L. ed. 763, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 194-Young v. Kelly, 3 App. D. C. 305- Gottschalk Co. v. Live Oak Distillery Co. 7 App. D. C. 173 -Droop v. Ridenour, 9 App. D. C. 108Babbington v. Washington Brewery Co. 13 App. D. C. 531- Beith v. Porter, 119 Mich. 372, 75 Am. St. Rep. 402, 78 N. W. 336. Editorial note. To set aside conveyance in fraud of creditors. 26: 433 III. Exhausting Legal Remedies. As Prerequisite to Bill for Discovery of Assets, see Discovery and Inspection, 7, 14. F. 10. The equitable defense that plaintiff has not exhausted his remedy at law, if not taken in limine, is waived. Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & I. Co. 150 U. S. 371, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 127. 37: 1113 Cited in Foltz v. St. Louis & S. R. Co. 8 C. C. A. 641, 19 U. S. App. 576, 60 Fed. 322 -Union P. R. Co. v. Harris, 12 C. C. A. 601, 27 U. S. App. 450, 63 Fed. 803-Western Electric Co. v. Reedy, 66 Fed. 164England v. Russell, 71 Fed. 824-Waite v. O'Neil, 72 Fed. 353-Temple v. Glasgow, 25 C. C. A. 543, 42 U. S. App. 417, 80 Fed. 444--Schoolfield v. Rhodes, 27 C. C. A. 99, 49 U. S. App. 486, 82 Fed. 157-Hutchinson V. American Palace-Car Co. 104 Fed. 185-Atlantic Trust Co. v. Dana, 62 C. C. A. 673, 128 Fed. 225-Droop v. Ridenour, App. D. C. 104-Tyler v. Moses, 13 App. D. C. 443. 11. Equity jurisdiction, in an action against the administrator of a deceased judg ment debtor, and one to whom he is alleged to have conveyed property in fraud of creditors, is not merely auxiliary to legal process, and it is not necessary, therefore, that the creditor should be in a position to levy an execution if the fraudulent obstacle were removed. Hagan v. Walker, 14 How. 29, 14: 312 Cited in Pullman v. Stebbins, 51 Fed. 12Ticonic Bank v. Harvey, 16 Iowa, 147Chillingworth v. Freeman, 67 Barb. 383National Tradesmen's Bank v. Wetmore, 124 N. Y. 251, 26 N. E. 548-Shell v. Boyd, 32 S. C. 363, 11 S. E. 205. 12. Where a bill was filed, by judgment creditors of an insolvent railroad company, after execution unsatisfied, against the purchasers upon mortgage foreclosure of the railroad property, to obtain the application, in payment of their judgments, of the unpaid part of the purchase price, an objection to the jurisdiction of equity, on the ground that a remedy at law exists, is utterly without merit. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Howard, 7 Wall. 392, 19: 117 In Federal court. Power of Federal Courts Notwithstanding State Remedy at Law, see Courts, 1030, 1032. Effect on Federal Courts of State Statute Dispensing with Reduction of Claim to Judgment, see Courts, 1038. 13. A suit in equity to subject the property of defendant to the payment of a debt cannot be maintained in a Federal court before proceedings at law to establish or en 'force it. Scott v. Neely, 140 U. S. 106, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 712, 35: 358 Cited in Swan Land & Cattle Co. v. Frank, 148 U. S. 612, 37 L. ed. 581, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 691-Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 456, 87 L. ed. 807, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 883--Curtain v. Talley, 46 Fed. 582-Chicago & A. Bridge Co. v. Anglo-American Packing & Provision Co. 46 Fed. 590-United States v. Ingate, 48 Fed. 253-Talley v. Curtain, 4 C. C. A. 180, 8 U. S. App. 347, 54 Fed. 46 -Morrow Shoe Mfg. Co. V. New England Shoe Co. 24 L.R.A. 425, 6 C. C. A. 521, 18 U. S. App. 256, 57 Fed. 698-Morrow Shoe Mfg. Co. v. New England Shoe Co. 24 L.R.A. 425, 8 C. C. A. 652, 18 U. S.. App. 616, 60 Fed. 341-Kittel v. Augusta, T. & G. R. Co. 65 Fed. 862-Hudson v. Randolph, 13 C. C. A. 403, 23 U. S. App. 681, 66 Fed. 217-England v. Russell, 71 Fed. 824-Brown v. John V. Farwell Co. 74 Fed. 765-Greenwood, A. & W. R. Co. v. Strang, 77 Fed. 499-Darragh v. H. Wetter Mfg. Co. 23 C. C. A. 614, 49 U. S. App. 1, 78 Fed. 11--Continental Trust Co. v. Toledo, St. L. & K. C. R. Co. 82 Fed. 661-First Nat. Bank v. Prager, 34 C. C. A. 54, 63 U. S. App. 703, 91 Fed. 692-Schofield v. Ute Coal & Coke Co. 92 Fed. 270-Ryder v. Bateman, 93 Fed. 22-Harrison v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 36 C. C. A. 443, 94 Fed. 729-Medberry v. Troutman, 94 Fed. 954-Farmers' Loan & T. Co. v. Centralla & C. R. Co. 37 C. C. A. 533, 96 Fed. 641A doue V. Strahan, 97 Fed. 692-Postal Teleg. Cable Co. v. Southern R. Co. 122 Fed. 160-Jones v. Mutual Fidelity Co. 123 Fed. 525-Viquesney v. Allen, 65 C. C. A. 262, 131 Fed. 24-George v. Wallace, 68 C. C. A. 47, 135 Fed. 293-Hess v. Horton, 2 App. D. C. 86-Droop v. Ridenour, 9 App. D. C. 104— Strasburger v. Dodge, 12 App. D. C. 51Springfield Grocery Co. v. Thomas, 3 Ind. Terr. 336, 58 S. W. 557-Mellier v. Bartlett, 106 Mo. 391, 17 S. W. 295-Davidson v. Dockery, 179 Mo. 694, 78 S. W. 624-Flournoy v. Bullock (Flournoy v. Champion) 11 N. M. 104, 55 L.R.A. 750, 66 Pac. 547. Judgment and execution. Necessity as Prerequisite to Equitable Necessity of Alleging Issuance and Re- See also infra, 23-26, 38, 39. 14. A creditors' bill must be preceded by a judgment at law establishing the measure and validity of the demand of the complainant. Smith v. Ft. Scott, H. & W. R. Co. 99 U. S. 398, 25: 437 Taylor v. Bowker, 111 U. S. 110, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 397, 28: 368 Cited in Fourth Nat. Bank v. Francklyn, 120 U. S. 755, 30 L. ed. 829, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 757-Scott v. Neely, 140 U. S. 113, 35 L. ed. 361, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 712-National Tube Works Co. v. Ballou, 146 U. S. 524, 36 L. ed. 1072, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 165-Swan Land & Cattle Co. v. Frank, 148 U. S. 612, 37 L. ed. 581, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 691- -Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 458, 37 L. ed. 808, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 883-United States v. Ingate, 48 Fed. 254-Pullman v. Stebbins, 51 Fed. 10Talley v. Curtain, 4 C. C. A. 179, 8 U. S. App. 347, 54 Fed. 45-Putney v. Whitmire, 66 Fed. 388-Goff v. Kelly, 74 Fed. 331 Greenwood, A. & W. R. Co. v. Strang. 77 Fed. 499-Peacock, H. & W. Co. v. Williams, 110 Fed. 919-Viquesney v. Allen, 65 C. C. A. 262, 131 Fed. 24-Hess v. Horton, 2 App. D. C. 87-First Nat. Bank v. Root, 107 Ind. 229, 8 N. E. 105-Smith v. Bourbon County, 43 Kan. 621, 23 Pac. 642-Baxter v. Moses, 77 Me. 476, 52 Am. Rep. 783, 1 Atl. 350Mellier v. Bartlett, 106 Mo. 391, 17 S. W. 295-Twell v. Twell, 6 Mont. 25, 9 Pac. 537 Fairbanks M. & Co. v. Welshans, 55 Neb. 380, 75 N. W. 865- -Dawson v. Coffey, 12 Or. 519, 8 Pac. 838-Dawson v. Sims, 14 Or. 562, 13 Pac. 506-McKeldin v. Gouldy, 91 Tenn. 681, 20 S. W. 231-Broughton v. Slusher, 2 Tenn. Ch. App. 325. 15. A creditor cannot proceed to set aside as fraudulent a conveyance of property, and to subject it to the payment of his claim, unless he has reduced his claim to judgment. Day v. Washburn, 23 How. 309, 16: 551 Cited in Barker v. Smith, 12 Nat. Bankr. Reg. 478, Fed. Cas. No. 986. V. 48 Fed. 609-Atlanta & F. R. Co. v. Western W. R. Co. 1 C. C. A. 680, 2 U. S. App. 227, 50 Fed. 794-Pullman v. Stebbins, 51 Fed. 10-Kittel v. Augusta, T. & G. R. Co. 65 Fed. 862-Randolph v. Allen, 19 C. C. A. 361, 41 U. S. App. 117, 73 Fed. 30--Go↑ v. Kelly, 74 Fed. 331-Brown v. John V. Farwell Co. 74 Fed. 765-Childs v. N. B. Carlstein Co. 76 Fed. 92-Bickford v. McComb, 88 Fed. 431-Schofield v. Ute Coal & Coke Co. 92 Fed. 271-Bidwell v. Huff, 103 Fed. 369-Lazarus Jewelry Co. v. Steinhardt, 50 C. C. A. 397, 112 Fed. 618-National Bank Hobbs, 118 Fed. 627-Hunt v. Weiner, 39 Ark. 75-Baines v. Babcock, 95 Cal. 591. 29 Am. St. Rep. 158, 27 Pac. 674-Shea v. Dulin, 3 MacArth. 342-Robinson v. Springfield Co. 21 Fla. 236-Thompson v. Pfeifer, 60 Kan. 423, 56 Pac. 763-Moyer v. Riggs, 8 Kan. App. 237, 55 Pac. 494-Baxter v. Moses, 77 Me. 476, 52 Am. Rep. 783. 1 Atl. 350-Trow v. Lovett, 122 Mass. 572-Preston V. Wilcox, 38 Mich. 581-Spooner v. Bay St. Louis Syndicate, 44 Minn. 404, 46 N. W. 848-Fleming v. Grafton, 54 Miss. 88 -Mellier v. Bartlett, 106 Mo. 391, 17 S. W. 295-Merchants' Nat. Bank v. Greenhood, 16 Mont. 439, 41 Pac. 250-Wilson v. Harris, 21 Mont. 403, 54 Pac. 46-Weil v. Lankins, 3 Neb. 387-Nebraska Nat. Bank V. Hallowell, 63 Neb. 316, 88 N. W. 556-Howard v. Raymers, 64 Neb. 214, 89 N. W. 1004 -Talbott v. Randall, 3 N. M. 372, 5 Pac. 533-Stanton v. Catron, 8 N. M. 363, 45 Pac. 884-Albright v. Texas, S. F. & N. R. Co. 8 N. M. 426, 46 Pac. 448-Booth v. Fuller, 35 App. Div. 120, 54 N. Y. Supp. 670-Stewart v. Beale, 7 Hun, 415-Easton Nat. Bank v. Buffalo Chemical Works, 48 Hun, 560, 1 N. Y. Supp. 250-Geery V. Geery, 63 N. Y. 256-Adsit v. Butler, 87 N. Y. 590-Page V. Grant, 9 Or. 119Wyatt v. Wyatt, 31 Or. 337, 49 Pac. 855 McKenna v. Crowley, 16 R. I. 365, 17 Atl. 354-Cassaday v. Anderson, 53 Tex. 537Galloway v. Hamilton, 68 Wis. 654, 32 N. W. 636-Ahlhauser v. Doud, 74 Wis. 408, 43 N. W. 169-Gilbert v. Stockman, 81 Wis. 610, 29 Am. St. Rep. 922, 51 N. W. 1076. 18. A creditor at large of a firm, having no specific lien or trust upon the property in question, cannot, before recovering judg17. A creditors' bill to enforce the payment, resort to equity to subject property ment of a judgment cannot be maintained fraudulently transferred to the payment of before an attempt has been made to collect his debt. Case v. Beauregard, 99 U. S. 119, the judgment at law by the issue of execution thereon. Jones v. Green, 1 Wall. 330, 16. As a general rule, a creditor's bill to Distinguished in Chadbourne v. Coe, 2 C. C. A. 17: 553 Distinguished in Mellen v. Moline Malleable Iron Works, 131 U. S. 367, 33 L. ed. 183, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 781-Ritten v. Union P. R. Co. 16 Rep. 199, Fed. Cas. No. 11,865aRutten v. Union P. R. Co. 17 Fed. 480--Talley v. Curtain, 4 C. C. A. 179, 8 U. S. App. 347, 54 Fed. 45-Howe v. Robinson, 20 Fla. 356-Quarl v. Abbett, 102 Ind. 244, 52 Am. Rep. 662, 1 N. E. 476-Twell v. Twell, 6 Mont. 25, 9 Pac. 537. Cited in Chittenden v. Brewster, 2 Wall. 196, 17 L. ed. 841-Freedman's Sav. & T. Co. v. Earle, 110 U. S. 715, 28 L. ed. 303, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 226---Scott v. Neely, 140 U. S. 113, 35 L. ed. 361, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 712-Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 458, 37 L. ed. 808, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 883-Barker V. Barker, 2 Woods, 91, Fed. Cas. No. 986- -Stewart v. Fagan, 2 Woods, 219, Fed. Cas. No. 13,426 Maish v. Bird, 4 McCrary, 132-Barker v. Smith, 12 Nat. Bankr. Reg. 478 -Walser v. Seligman, 21 Blatchf. 132, 13 Fed. 416-Tuck v. Olds, 29 Fed. 741-Maish v. Bird, 25: 370 Cited in Hibernia Ins. Co. v. St. Louis & N O. Transp. Co. 3 McCrary, 371, 10 Fed. 598 -Dahlman v. Jacobs, 5 McCrary, 132, 15 Fed. 864-Hibernia Ins. Co. v. St. Louis & N. O. Transp. Co. 5 McCrary, 400, 17 Fed. 480-Fogg v. St. Louis, H. & K. R. Co. 5 McCrary, 451, 17 Fed. 872--Putney v. Whitmire, 66 Fed. 388- Schuster v. Rader, 13 Colo. 336, 22 Pac. 505- Fairbanks, M. & Co. v. Welshans, 55 Neb. 380, 75 N. W. 865. 19. Where the bill is filed to set aside a deed as fraudulent, to defeat the preferences given therein to other creditors, the objection that the demands of complainants had not been reduced to judgment and execution before filing the bill is fatal to the relief sought, if taken in time; but where such objection was waived, the court was right in proceeding to make a ratable distribution among all the creditors. Washburn, 24 How. 352, Day v. 16: 712 Cited in Wells v. Dalrymple, Fed. Cas. No. 17,392. 20. Although the revisions of the stat utes of Maine of 1857 and 1871 do not, in terms, require a creditor to allege in a creditor's bill that his judgment remained unsatisfied by reason of his inability to find corporate property wherewith to satisfy it, such revisions do not change the law or modify the ground upon which relief in equity can be obtained. Taylor v. Bowker, 111 U. S. 110, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 397, 28: 368 Cited in National Tube Works Co. v. Ballou, 146 U. S. 524, 36 L. ed. 1072, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 165-Blackwell v. Hatch, 13 Okla. 173, 73 Pac. 933. 21. The rule that a creditor must obtain judgment on his claim before he can subject the property of his debtor to its payment, in equity, is not changed by the fact that the suit is brought in a court in which at the time is pending another suit for the foreclosure of a mortgage or trust deed upon the property of the debtor. Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & I. Co. 150 U. S. 371, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 127. 37: 1113 Cited in United States Shipbuilding Co. v. Conklin, 60 C. C. A. 683, 126 Fed. 135Duryea v. American Woodworking Mach. Co. 133 Fed. 332-Gay v. Brierfield Coal & I. Co. 106 Ala. 621, 17 So. 618. 22. Issuance of an execution is not a necessary prerequisite for equity to entertain a creditor's bill, when it appears that the creditor is without remedy at law, that the debtor is insolvent, and that the issuance of the execution would be of no practical rtility. Case v. New Orleans & C. R. Co. (Case v. Beauregard) 101 U. S. 688. 25: 1004 Cited in Fitzpatrick v. Flannagan, 106 U. S. 655, 27 L. ed. 213, 1 Sup. Ct. Rep. 369 Johnson v. Powers, 139 U. S. 164, 35 L. ed. 115, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 525-Johnson v. Powers, 13 Fed. 316-Massachusetts Mut. L. Ins. Co. v. Chicago & A. R. Co. 13 Fed. 862 -Clapp v. Dittman, 21 Fed. 18-Holladay Case, 27 Fed. 845-Talley v. Curtain, 4 C. C. A. 181, 8 U. S. App. 347, 54 Fed. 46Livingston v. Swofford Bros Dry Goods Co. 12 Colo. App. 326, 56 Pac. 351-Springfield Grocery Co. v. Thomas, 3 Ind. Terr. 336, 58 S. W. 557-Sills v. Goodyear, 80 Mo. App. 133 Merchants' Nat. Bank v. Green hood. 16 Mont. 442, 41 Pac. 250-National 248, 26 N. E. 548-Fleischner v. First Nat. Bank, 36 Or. 563, 60 Pac. 603-Bird v. Calvert, 22 S. C. 296-Austin v. Morris, 23 S. C. 403-Miller v. Hughes, 33 S. C. 540, 12 S. E. 419-Enright v. Grant, 5 Utah, 342, 15 Pac. 268-Ogden State Bank v. Barker, 12 Utah, 24, 40 Pac. 765. Tradesmen's Bank v. Wetmore, 124 N. Y. 137, 19 L. ed. 108-Phelps v. Smith, 116 Ind. 401, 19 N. E. 156. Cited in Austin v. Barrows, 41 Conn. 299Severinghaus v. Beckman, 9 Ind. App. 391, 36 N. E. 930-Work Bros. v. McCoy, 87 Iowa, 223, 54 N. W. 140-Bitzer v. Wash burn, 121 Iowa, 466, 96 N. W. 978-Chambers v. Baldwin, 91 Ky. 129, 11 L.R.A. 550, 34 Am. St. Rep. 165, 15 S. W. 57-Kimball v. Harman, 34 Md. 411, 6 Am. Rep. 340O'Callaghan V. Cronan, 121 Mass. 115Jenks v. Hoag, 179 Mass. 585, 61 N. E.' 221-Schmoltz v. Schmoltz, 116 Mich. 695, 75 N. W. 135-Barr v. Cubbage, 52 Mo. 414 -Hurwitz v. Hurwitz, 10 Misc. 356, 31 N. Y. Supp. 25-Farmers' Loan & T. Co. v. New York & N. R. Co. 150 N. Y. 432, 34 L.R.A. 84, 55 Am. St. Rep. 639, 44 N. E. 1043-Ward v. Petrie, 157 N. Y. 310, 68 Am. St. Rep. 790, 51 N. E. 1002--Klous v. Hennessey, 13 R. I. 336-Le Gierse v. Kellum, 66 Tex. 244, 18 S. W. 509-Weekes v. Sunset Brick & Tile Co. 22 Tex. Civ. App. 565, 56 S. W. 243-Rothchild Bros. v. Tre-Porter wella, 36 Wash. 682, 68 L.R.A. 282v. Mack, 50 W. Va. 584, 40 S. E. 459Martens v. Reilly, 109 Wis. 472, 84 N. W. 840. 24. Simple-contract creditors whose claims have not been reduced to judgment, and who have no express lien by mortgage, trust deed, or otherwise, cannot come into a Federal court of equity to obtain the seizure of the property of their debtor and its application to the satisfaction of their claims, notwithstanding a statute of the state may authorize such a proceeding in the courts of the state. Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 883, 977, 37: 804 Cited in England v. Russell, 71 Fed. 821 Childs v. N. B. Carlstein Co. 76 Fed. 93- 25. A general creditor cannot assail, as fraudulent against creditors, an assignment or transfer of property made by his debtor, until he has first established his debt by the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, and has either acquired a lien upon the property, or is in a situation to perfect a lien thereon and subject it to the payment of his judgment upon the removal of the obstacle presented by the fraudulent assignment or transfer. Cates v. Allen, 149 U. S. 451, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 977, 37: 804 Cited in Morrow Shoe Mfg. Co. v. New England Shoe Co. 24 L.R.A. 425, 6 C. C. A. 521, 18 U. S. App. 256, 57 Fed. 698-Morrow Shoe Mfg. Co. v. New England Shoe Co. 24 L.R.A. 425, 8 C. C. A. 652, 18 U. S. App. 616, 60 Fed. 341-Kittel v. Augusta, T. & G. R. Co. 65 Fed. 862-Hudson v. Randolph, 13 C. C. A. 403, 23 U. S. App. 681, 66 Fed. 217-Putney V. Whitmire, 66 Fed. 388England v. Russell, 71 Fed. 825-Brown v. John V. Farwell Co. 74 Fed. 765-Darragh v. H. Wetter Mfg. Co. 23 C. C. A. 614, 49 U. S. App. 1, 78 Fed. 11-Continental Trust Co. v. Toledo, St. L. & K. C. R. Co. 82 Fed. 661-Schofield v. Ute Coal & Coke Co. 92 Fed. 270-Shepard v. Tulare Irrig. District. 94 Fed. 6-Farmers' Loan & T. Co. v. Centralia & C. R. Co. 37 C. C. A. 533, 96 Fed. 641-Adoue v. Strahan, 97 Fed. 692-Jones |