Debt created while in Fiduciary Character-On a specification in opposition to a discharge setting forth that a debt due by bankrupts was created while they were acting in a fiduciary character: Held, that the fact was no ground for withholding discharge: Re Tracy and others, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 98.

Filing of Specification in Time.-A creditor as assignee of a note of the bankrupt secured by a deed of trust on land, cannot come in and oppose discharge of the bankrupt unless he shall have entered his opposition and filed his specifications within the proper time and according to rule Re Mc Vey, Dist. of Mississippi, 2 B. R. 85.

Specifications in Opposition filed nunc pro tunc.-In a proper case, where the omission to file specifications in opposition to the discharge within ten days after the return day to show cause was inadvertent, creditors may file same with permission, nunc pro tunc: Re Grefe, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 106.

Creditors who have not proved.-Creditors who have not proved their debts can oppose discharge of bankrupt: Re Boutelle, Dist. of N. H., 2 B. R. 51.

Certificate of Register as to Bankrupt's Oath.-The register is to certify conformity, or non-conformity on presentation to him by the bankrupt of the oath required by section 29, and where there be specifications in opposition to the discharge, the register may certify conformity except in the particulars covered by the specifications: Re Pulver, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 101.

VII. RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF ASSIGNEE.

Choice of-Where an assignee is chosen by the greater part in value and number of the creditors who have proved their claims, and there is no imputation either upon his capacity or integrity, he is assigned by virtue of law, and the judge is not competent to interfere. Re Grant, Dist. of So. Car., 2 B. R. 35.

Should not solicit Votes for his Appointment.-The court will not sanction the solicitation of votes of creditors by persons seeking thereby to be chosen assignees: Re So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 100.

Conveyance by Register to Assignee.-Register has the right to convey the estate to the assignee when there is "no opposing interest," although the title to the property is in dispute: In re Wylie, Dist. of Maryland, 2

B. R. 53.

Suit for Property fraudulently disposed of by Bankrupt.-Property fraudulently disposed of by bankrupt in proceedings by or against him may be recovered by the assignee upon petition in the Bankruptcy Court, proceedings upon which may be of a summary character.

The district judge may order issues of fact arising in such cases to be tried by a jury.

Suits may be brought at common law, or by bill in equity, for the recovery of property in such cases, but as they must be governed by technical rules, and be subject to the delays incident thereto, it is preferable to proceed by summary proceedings in the Court of Bankruptcy,

VOL. XVII.-16

that being a cheaper, speedier, and more simple mode: Neall v. Beckwith and others, Nor. Dist. Ohio, 2 B. R. 82.

Suit for Property conveyed by Bankrupt within four months.—In an action of trover brought by an assignee in bankruptcy against a creditor to recover the value of certain property transferred by the bankrupt to the creditor within four months preceding the adjudication of bankruptcy, it not being shown that a preference of creditors, or a fraud on the act, was thereby intended. Held, that the assignee could not recover: Wadsworth v. Tyler, Dist. of Connecticut, 2 B. R. 101.

Suit to recover Payments made to Mortgage- Creditor.—A chattelmortgage of a stock of goods executed by one copartner under seal, and assented to by the other partner by parol, is valid, and is not invalidated by the fact that such mortgages are not required by law to be under seal: Hawkins v. Bank, Dist. of Minnesota, 2 B. R. 108.

Where mortgagors in such a mortgage had stipulated to retain possession of goods to sell and dispose of them as agents of the mortgagee, a national bank: Held, in an action brought by the assignee in bankruptcy to set the mortgage aside and recover the amount of deposits made by the mortgagor with the mortgagee, that the mortgage-debt would be extinguished by sales and deposits with the mortgagee, by the mortgagors in possession, and no recovery could be had: Id.

VIII. PROOF OF DEBT.

Creditor, with Security.-A creditor of a bankrupt holding the security of a deed of trust in the nature of a mortgage, with a power of sale in a third party as trustee, must prove his debt as a creditor holding a security, and obtain the permission of the court to have the security sold. If he direct a sale without this permission, the court, upon application of the assignee, will set aside the sale: Re Bittel and Others, East. Dist. Mo., 2 B. R. 125.

If the trustee sell without the authority of the court, whether any title pass to the purchaser, quære: Id.

Fraudulent Debt.-A debt created by fraud is provable. Where amount due to a creditor is in dispute in a state court, the Court of Bankruptcy may allow the suit to proceed: Re Rundle and Jones, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 49.

Judgment for Breach of Promise of Marriage.-A judgment obtained on breach of promise to marry is a debt provable in bankruptcy and is barred by discharge. Concealment to oppose discharge of bankrupt must be wilful: Re Sidle, So. Dist. Ohio, 2 B. R. 77.

Judgment after Adjudication.-A judgment extinguishes the debt upon which it was founded and constitutes a new debt. A judgment obtained after an adjudication of bankruptcy is not provable against estate of bankrupt: Re Williams, Dist. of Connecticut, 2 B. R. 79.

Action to Recover may be stayed.-An action to recover a provable debt is to be stayed until a determination is had as to the discharge, whether the debt be one that will be discharged or one that will not: Re Rosenberg, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 81.

IX DISTRIBUTION.

Jurisdiction of State Courts.-The distribution of the assets of a bankrupt cannot be interfered with by process of state court. Money awarded under a rule of court cannot be attached: Re Bridgman, So. Dist. Georgia, 2 B. R. 84.

Partnership Debts.-A creditor, the obligee of a joint and several bond given by the members of a copartnership, is entitled to dividends out of the several assets of the individual bankrupts, members of the firm, the firm and its several members having been adjudicated bankrupt: Re Bigelow and Others, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 121.

X. COSTS.

Bankrupt as Witness.-A bankrupt summoned by creditor to appear as witness is not entitled to witness fees: Re McNair, Dist. Nor. Car., 2 B. R. 77.

The party for whom services are performed by the officers of the court must pay the fees incident to such services. A creditor is only bound to pay expenses of his own examination. Bankrupt making further statements after creditor's examination is closed, must pay his own expenses: Re Mealy, Nor. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 51.

United States Marshal as Messenger.-Travel by a United States marshal as messenger to make return on warrant of bankruptcy is necessary, and mileage of five cents per mile therefor is a proper charge.

A charge by marshal of ten cents per folio for preparing notices to ' creditors is an improper charge.

An item for attendance is an improper charge: Re Talbot, So. Dist. Georgia, 2 B. R. 93.

XI. REGISTER.

Powers of-A register has power to fill up blank, issue summons, &c., the same as judge. The register has no right to summon witnesses for the purpose of eliciting the facts on which to base an exception. A register has the power to call bankrupt before him to answer matters touching property, his discharge, &c. A register may proceed the same as the judge when there is no controversy: Re Brandt, Dist. of Nor. Car., 2 B. R. 76.

Power to order Payment of Fees.-The register has power to order the payment of fees and expenses incurred in a case out of assets in the hand of the assignee, on application of the attorney for the bankrupt : Re Lane, So. Dist. N. Y., 2 B. R. 100.

Control over Proceedings.-In questions of postponement, and of cases of adjournments before registers, they must exercise proper legal discretion. Subject to this rule, they have entire legal control of cases before them, and must exercise their best judgment in preventing unnecessary and unreasonable delays: Re Hyman, So. Dist. Ñ. Y., 2 B. R. 107.

ABSTRACTS OF RECENT AMERICAN DECISIONS.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.1

COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND."

COURT OF CHANCERY OF NEW JERSEY.3

AGENT.

Notice of his Authority.-A party dealing with an agent for a special purpose must ascertain at his own peril the agent's power. And where an agent's contract to sell land at a fixed price has been approved by the principal, the purchaser has no right to infer from that fact that the agent has power to alter the terms of the contract: The National Iron Armor Company v. Bruner, 4 C. E. Green.

An agent with restricted power to sell a tract of land at a given price, has no power to bind his principal by any representation as to the quantity or quality of the land. Such representations, if false, may avoid the contract: Id

ARBITRATION AND AWARD.

Government Claims.-An Act of Congress referring a claim against the government to an officer of one of the executive departments to examine and adjust, does not, even though the claimant and government act under the statute and the account is examined and adjusted, make the case one of arbitrament and award in the technical sense of these words, and so as to bind either party as by submission to award: Gordon v. United States, 7 Wall.

Hence, a subsequent act repealing the one making the reference (the claim not being yet paid) impairs no right and is valid. De Groot v. United States, 5 Wall. 432, affirmed: Id.

Semble, that the court does not sanction the allowance of interest on claims against the government: Id.

ATTORNEY.

Privileged Communication.-An agreement made in the presence of an attorney between his client and a third person, is not a privileged communication: Carr v. Weld, 4 C. E. Green.

CHARITABLE USES.

Object of the Statute.-The object of the statute of charitable uses in England was not to restrain gifts to such uses, but to enforce and make valid such gifts in certain cases in which they had before been held void because the object was too vague and indefinite: Norris et al. v. Thomson's Ex'rs. et al., 4 C. E. Green.

The statute of charitable uses has never been enacted in this state,

From J. W. Wallace, Esq., Reporter; to appear in 7 Wall. Rep.

2 From J. S. Stockett, Esq.. Reporter; to appear in 28 Md. Rep.

3 From C. E. Green, Esq., Reporter; to appear in 4 C. E. Green's Rep.

and therefore English decisions founded upon its provisions may not be of authority here, but such as declare gifts void on account of the objects being too vague and indefinite upon principles adopted as part of the common law before the statute, should be regarded: Id.

A power of appointment given to one by a will to give or devise certain property among such benevolent, religious, or charitable institutions as he may think proper, is void because so vague and indefinite that it cannot be enforced. And the defect in this case would not be aided in England by the statute of charitable uses: Id.

Where a power to dispose of property is conferred upon a person to whom a life estate or some other interest in it is given, this is a power in gross and can be relinquished or surrendered, but where such power is given to one who has no interest in the property it is a power simply collateral and cannot be surrendered: Id.

An act of the legislature which in a particular case authorizes the surrender of such power when simply collateral, or confirms such surrender when made, is constitutional and valid; it divests or takes away no vested or settled rights: Id.

Change in Name and other Particulars of Corporation Trustee.— Where a testator devises the income of property in trust primarily for one object, and if the income is greater than that object needs, the surplus to others (secondary ones), a bill in the nature of a bill quia timet, and in anticipation of an incapacity in the trusts to be executed hereafter, and when a surplus arises (there being no surplus now, nor the prospect of any), will not lie by heirs at law (supposing them otherwise entitled, which here they were decided not to be), to have this surplus appropriated to them on the ground of the secondary trusts having, subsequently to the testator's death, become incapable of execution: Girard v. Philadelphia, 7 Wall

Neither the identity of a municipal corporation, nor its right to hold property devised by it, is destroyed by a change of its name, an enlargement of its area, or an increase in the number of its corporators. And these are changes which the legislature has power to make: Id.

Ex. gr.: A city having the name of "The Mayor, Aldermen, and Citizens of Philadelphia," covered two square miles, was surrounded by twenty-eight incorporated municipalities, more populous than itself, and which, with it, covered a hundred and twenty-nine miles square, and made the county of Philadelphia. An Act of Assembly enacted that the name above given should be changed to "The City of Philadelphia." and the boundaries of the said city extended so as embrace the whole territory of the county, and that all the powers of the said corporation, as enlarged and modified by the act, should be exercised and have effect within the said county, and over the inhabitants thereof. The act also consolidated the aggregated debt of all the corporations and made it the debt of the new city, and largely extended and changed the organization of the old city.

Held, that the original corporation was not destroyed, and (the consolidating act having declared that all the estates held by any of the corporations affected by the act should be held "upon and for the same uses, trusts, limitations, charities, and conditions as the same were then held") that the new city had every capacity to take and hold, and every power to execute trusts which were possessed by the old one: Id.