BANKRUPT LAW-Continued.

against both for the full value of all the property, though the pur-
chasers may have been interested in different proportions. Schu-
lenburg v. Kaburek,

-

-

132.
32. SECTION 35.-PETITION. — VARIANCE. - Where the assignee in
bankruptcy brings an action under section 35 of the bankrupt act
specifically to recover the value of property conveyed by the bank-
rupt to the defendant by way of illegal preference under the act
and issue is taken thereon, the assignee must recover on the case stated
in his declaration, and cannot under such an issue recover on the
ground that the conveyance to the defendant was void at common
law, or under the statutes of the state. Cragin v. Carmichael,

519.
33. SECRET PReference.- ComPOSITION Deed.— Right of assignee to
recover amount of secret preference obtained by a creditor under a
composition deed. Bean v. Brookmire,

108.
34. BANKER.- PAYMENTS FROM SUSPENDED BANKER.- A banker who
allows his drafts to go to protest, suspends payment, and closes
his doors against depositors, proclaims to the world that he is
insolvent, and a creditor who, with knowledge of these facts, re-
ceives payment of his debt secures an illegal preference, and is lia-
ble to the assignee for the amount thus received. Markson v. Hob-
327.
35. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE.-The assignee in bankruptcy represents
the rights of creditors, and may attack conveyances made by the bank-
rupt in fraud of his creditors, although the creditors are creditors at
large of the bankrupt. Cragin v. Carmichael,

son,

519.
36. Same.-UNRECORDED CHATTEL MORTGAGE.-The construction of
the statutes of the state of Iowa by the supreme court as to the
validity of an unrecorded chattel mortgage against creditors with no-
tice thereof, followed in a case where the assignee in bankruptcy, in
an action in that state, sought to avoid the mortgage, because in-
valid under the statutes of the state..
lb.
37. FRAUDULENT TRANSFER - Testimony considered to establish the
fraudulent transfer of property charged as an act of bankruptcy. In
re Picton,
548.
38. SALES BY BONA FIDES OF PURCHASER.- What circumstances will
put the purchaser upon inquiry as to the bona fides of a proposed
sale, and the degree of inquiry that is requisite, considered. Ib.
39. SECTION 35.— Fraudulent Preference.—The defendants, private
bankers, received from the bankrupts, also private bankers, after
they had closed their doors for general business, a draft on New
York "for collection," and on being advised by their correspond-
ents in New York of its payment there, then paid the full amount
thereof to one of the bankrupts: Held, if this payment to the bank-

BANKRUPT LAW - Continued.

rupts was made in good faith, without reasonable cause on the part
of the defendants to believe that the bankrupts intended to make
therewith any fraudulent payments or preferences, that the defend-
ants were not liable to the assignee in bankruptcy under the 35th
section of the bankrupt act. Borland v. Phillips,
383.
40. DOWER. FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE.- As against the assignee in
bankruptcy, the wife is not barred or estopped to claim dower, by
reason of her having joined her husband in a deed which is fraudu-
lent as to creditors, and which has for this reason been set aside at
the instance of the assignee. Cox v. Wilder,
45.
41. HOMESTEAD.-FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE.-A similar principle
was applied under the statute of Missouri to the homestead exemption
right, which, as against the assignee in bankruptcy, was held not
to be forfeited by the making of a fraudulent conveyance, which
was set aside at the instance of the assignee. Cox v. Wilder, 45.
42. ACCOMMODATION BILL.— HOLDER'S RIGHTS.— The bona fide holder
for value of an accommodation bill is entitled, on the bankruptcy
of parties thereto, to prove as to all parties against whom the holder
could have supported an action on the bill. Downing's Assignee v.
Traders' Bank,
136.
43. Same.-PARTIAL PAYMENTS BY SURETY.-The receipt by a holder
of a bill drawn by the bankrupt, but accepted for the accommoda-
tion of the drawer, of partial payment from the accommodation
acceptor after the bankruptcy of the drawer, does not disentitle such
holder from proving against the estate of the drawer in bankruptcy
for the full amount due on the bill at the time of the adjudication
of bankruptcy.
Ib.
44. Same.-Section 19 of the bankrupt act, in respect to partial pay-
ments made by a surety after the bankruptcy of the principal debtor,
considered.
Ib.
45. Same. A mere covenant by a creditor not to sue an accommoda-
tion acceptor, does not prevent him from proving against the draw-
er's estate in bankruptcy.
Ib.
46. PAYMENTS TO BANKRUPT.- Payments made mala fide to a debtor
after a petition in bankruptcy is filed against him, are void. Bab-
bitt v. Burgess,
169.
47. Same. Whether payments under all circumstances made to such
a debtor are void, quære?
Ib.
48. DISCHARGE. WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT.- A creditor who has
consented in writing to the discharge of the bankrupt under the
fifty per cent clause, and whose consent has been acted upon and
filed, has no absolute right to withdraw or cancel it, though such
right be claimed on the day fixed for the hearing. In re Brent,

129.

BANKRUPT LAW - Continued.

49. DISCHARGE.- Fraud.-SECTION 29.- Section 29, as to what frauds
upon the bankrupt act will disentitle the bankrupt to a discharge,
considered.
Ib.
50. SECTION 29.- DISCHARGE.- WHEN TO BE APPLIED FOR- Under
section 29 of the bankrupt act, where there are no assets, the dis-
trict court may grant an application by the bankrupt for a discharge,
although not applied for within a year, where the delay is satisfac-
torily excused. In re Donaldson,
546.

51. SALE BY ASSIGNEE.-APPROVAL.- Sales by assignee are subject to
the approval of the court. In re O'Fallon,
548.

52. COMPULSORY EXAMINATION of bankrupt not evidence against him
in a criminal proceeding. United States v. Prescott,

405.

BILLS AND NOTES.

Forged indorsements. See Certificate of Deposit.

BONDS. See Bail.

1. Release of property on bond, and its effect,

299.

2. Power of municipalities to issue. See County; Municipal Corpora-
tions.

3. FERRY.-BRIDGE.-Charter Construed. The legislature, in the
charter of the Lawrence Bridge Company, gave it the exclusive
right and privilege of building and maintaining a bridge across the
Kansas river at the city of Lawrence for the period of twenty-one
years," but prior to the time of the passage of such charter the leg-
islature had given to one Baldwin the exclusive right to maintain a
ferry at said city for the term of fifteen years, which franchise, at
the time the bridge charter was passed, had over twelve years to
run. Subsequently Baldwin ceased to operate his ferry, but the
state authorities, under an act of the legislature respecting public
ferries, granted a license to keep a ferry at the city of Lawrence
within the limits and period covered by the bridge company's
charter: Held, that the establishment of a ferry was not an infringe-
ment of the charter of the bridge company. Parrott v. City of Law-
rence,
332.

BURDEN OF PROOF.

1. In action for loss of cargo,

2. In actions on policies. See Insurance.

CARRIER. See Railroads.

CHALLENGE. See Jury.

CHANCERY. See Equity, and Various Heads.

14.

CHARTER. See Bridge; Corporation; Railroad Taxes; Union Pacific
Railroad Company.

CHATTEL MORTGAGE. See Bankrupt Law; Iowa.

CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT.

FORGED INDORSEMENT.— When bank paying forged indorsement must
lose amount. Rule and exception. State National Bank v. Freed-
men's Saving Co.
11.
CIRCUIT COURTS. See Courts; Elections; Jurisdiction; Mandamus.
1. JURISDICTION.-HOW CONFERRED.-The circuit courts of the United
States can exercise jurisdiction in no case solely upon the ground
that it falls within the constitutional grant of judicial power to the
United States; there must also be an act of Congress expressly con-
ferring the jurisdiction. Harrison v. Hadley, Governor, 229.
2. JURISDICTION.-STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS.-A citizen does not
lose his rights because Congress has not vested in the courts of the
United States original jurisdiction in cases where rights and benefits
are claimed under the constitution of the United States. The state
courts are open to such citizen, and in such cases the rule of decision
in a state court is the same as it would be in a United States
court.
Ib.
3. JURISDICTION.- AMOUNT.- To give the circuit court jurisdiction,
the matter in dispute must exceed $500, and the amount in dispute
is what is claimed in all the counts in the declaration upon causes
of action which are properly joined, and not what is claimed in any
one count. Judson v. Macon County,
213.
4. Same. There is nothing in the act of June 1, 1872 (17 Stats. at
Large, 191, sec. 5), or in the statutes of Missouri, so far as applica-
ble to the circuit court, to change the above rule. Hence, a declara-
tion with eleven counts, each count being upon a distinct coupon
for $50, shows a case, as to amount, within the jurisdiction of the
circuit court.
Ib.

5. JURISDICTION.— STATE Laws.— State legislation cannot affect the ju-
risdiction of this court; and a person who has the right under the
judiciary act to sue in this court cannot be compelled by an act of

CIRCUIT COURTS-Continued.

the state legislature first to obtain leave of a state court. Phelps v.
O'Brien County,
518.

Same. Upon this principle, a provision of the state statutes requir-
ing leave of court to enable a party to sue upon a judgment ren-
dered in any court of the state, is not applicable to the circuit court
of the United States.
Ib.
6. JURISDICTION.-BANKRUPT ACT. The circuit court of the United
States has jurisdiction of a common law or equity action brought by
an assignee in bankruptcy appointed in another district where such
an assignee is a citizen of another state, and the defendant is a citi-
zen of the state where the action is brought, and the amount in
dispute exceeds the sum of five hundred dollars. Payson v.
Dietz,

(See Bankrupt Law.)

504.

7. JURISDICTION.-STATE AS PLAINTIFF.- A State cannot maintain as
plaintiff an action in the circuit court of the United States. Wis-
consin v. Duluth,
406.
8. JURISDICTION.-ENJOINING STATE OFFICERS.- The Circuit Court of
the United States may, in a proper case, enjoin the agents or officers of a
state, whatever may be their grade, and this although the state may
be the real party in interest; this doctrine applied in this case
against the Governor of Missouri acting as the special agent of the
state in the foreclosure of a mortgage lien for the benefit of the
state. Murdock v. Woodson,
188.

9. CITIZENSHIP.— MARSHAL'S BOND.-JURISDICTION.—In suits by indi-
viduals on marshal's official bond the court has jurisdiction, even
where all the parties are citizens of the same state. Adler v. New-
comb,

45.

10. JUDGMENT.- Amount of judgment in such case.
11. BANKRUPTCY.-Jurisdiction in. See Bankrupt Law.

Ib.

12. MANDAMUS.-Jurisdiction in mandamus proceedings. See Man-
damus.

13. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY. - Jurisdiction over.
Mandamus; Union Pacific Railroad Company.

See

14. INTERNAL REVENUE PROCEEDINGS. - Jurisdiction. See Internal
Revenue.

CITY. See Municipal Corporation.

COINS. See Criminal Law.

COLLISION. See Admiralty.

COMBUSTIBLE MATERIALS. See Steamboats.