A petition was dismissed under the Act of 1841 because the petitioner owed debts that had been contracted in a fiduciary capacity, notwithstanding he owed other debts not so contracted. In re Cease, 5 Law Rep. 408; 5 Fed. Cas. 388 (1812).

Under the Act of 1841, the court allowed a voluntary petition to be filed after the filing of a petition in involuntary bankruptcy. In re Canfield, 5 Law Rep. 415; 5 Fed. Cas. 8 (1843).

A debtor had made an assignment under the insolvent law of his state, and a creditor had thereafter applied to have the bond of the assignee increased. Held, that this did not estop him from filing a petition in bankruptcy based on the assignment. Perry v. Langley, 1 N. B. R. 599; 19 Fed. Cas. 280.

When the claim of the petitioning creditor is barred by the statute of limitations of the domicile, the petition will be dismissed. In re Cornwall, 9 Blatchf. 114; 6 Fed. Cas. 586.

A note was given without consideration, and lost while in the possession of the promisee, and thereupon another note was given to replace it. Held, that it was not a sufficient claim to entitle the holder to commence proceedings in bankruptcy against the maker. In re Cornwall, 4 N. B. R. 400; 6 Fed. Cas. 595.

A contract between the petitioners and the alleged bankrupt was such that the former was to buy cotton for future delivery, and settle, not by the delivery of the cotton, but by paying or receiving the difference in price. Held, that a note given by the bankrupt to pay losses incurred on such a contract was valid, and would support a petition in involuntary bankruptcy. Lehman et al. v. Strassberger, 2 Woods, 554; 15 Fed. Cas.

254.

It was held to be sufficient, under the Act of 1867, that the debt of the petitioning creditor existed when the alleged act of bankruptcy was committed, although it was not then due. The court further expressed the opinion that the law should be construed against the right of a creditor to maintain a petition who had become a creditor after the commission of the alleged act of bankruptcy. In re Muller et al., Deady, 513; 17 Fed. Cas. 971.

The court refused an application of a petitioner in involuntary bankruptcy to file an amended petition, setting forth a note indorsed by the bankrupt which had not matured when the original petition was filed. In re Morse, 17 Blatchf. 72; 17 Fed. Cas. 846.

Petitions in bankruptcy proceedings are treated as the joint act of all the petitioners, and those who had no actual knowledge of any falsehood which they contained are responsible until their innocence clearly appears. In re Keiler et al., 18 N. B. R. 10; 14 Fed. Cas. 210.

One creditor was induced by the fraudulent representations of another to release his debt, and in consequence of such a release the latter secured a preference. Held, that the former was not disqualified by the release, under the circumstances, from filing a petition against the debtor. Michaels v. Post, 21 Wall. 398.

A creditor could file a petition in involuntary bankruptcy under the Aet of 1841 upon a debt not yet due, but which was certain and liquidated. In re King, 1 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 276; 14 Fed. Cas. 509.

The petitioning creditor was a city, and it had received part of its claim from sureties on the bond of the bankrupt. The petition was entertained, and an adjudication had, after the city had paid into the registry of the court the money so received. In re Marcer, 6 N. B. R. 351; 16 Fed. Cas. 699.

Under the laws of Michigan a suit will not be maintained in the state courts for a debt on account of sales of intoxicating liquor. A bankrupt against whom adjudication had been entered by default, moved to set aside his default on the ground that the claim of the petitioning creditor was of the character mentioned. The motion was disallowed. In re Neilson, 7 N. B. R. 505; 17 Fed. Cas. 1301.

The by-laws of a corporation authorized the stockholders present at any meeting to elect a director to cast the votes of absentees. A resolution that the corporation go into bankruptcy was adopted by such a vote, only a small number of stockholders being present. Eight months afterward. a stockholder, who was also a director, and against whom a suit for negligence in the latter capacity had been commenced, and who was not present at the meeting, filed a petition for the dismissal of the proceedings. The petition was denied. In re Collateral L. & S. Bank, 5 Saw. 331: 6 Fed. Cas. 100.

A petition that failed to state that the petitioner constituted one-fourth of the number of creditors, and that his debts amounted to one-third of the debts provable, was not cured by a paper filed at the same time, signed by the debtor, admitting that the required number and amount of his creditors had joined in the petition, and consenting that the proceedings be had. In re Keeler, 10 N. B. R. 419; 14 Fed. Cas. 176.

A petition in involuntary bankruptcy should describe the petitioners' debts so far as to enable the court to determine whether they are provable. When a preference is alleged as an act of bankruptcy, the name of the person preferred should be given. It need not be stated that it was in fraud of the Bankrupt Act. In re Hadley, 12 N. B. R. 366; 11 Fed. Cas. 148.

It was held to be sufficient under the amendment of 1874 for a petition in involuntary bankruptcy to state upon belief that the required number of creditors had signed. In re Mann, 13 Blatchf. 401; 16 Fed. Cas. 634. Partnership debts should be considered on a petition against the individual bankrupt in determining whether the required number of creditors have signed. In re Price, 3 Dill. 514, n.; 19 Fed. Cas. 1312.

In determining whether the required number of creditors had joined in a petition in involuntary bankruptcy, it was held, under the Act of 1867, that a creditor who had once joined could not withdraw. In re Philadelphia Axle Works, 19 Fed. Cas. 494.

Held, under the Act of 1867, that debts less than $250 are to be taken into account in determining whether the required number of creditors bad

united in a petition in involuntary bankruptcy. In re McAdam, 4 Saw. 119; 15 Fed. Cas. 1201.

Where the petition contains an averment that the number and amount of creditors signing are sufficient, the fact cannot be re-examined after adjudication, unless fraud is alleged, either by the court of bankruptcy, or in any collateral proceeding. In re Duncan et al., 8 Ben. 365; 8 Fed. Cas. 1.

The question being whether the required number and amount of creditors had joined in the petition, the court held that a creditor who was amply secured, and did not waive his security, should not be considered in the computation. In re Crossette, 17 N. B. R. 208; 6 Fed. Cas. 894.

Creditors claiming liens, or having security, could not be taken into account in determining whether the required number had joined in the petition under the Act of 1867 as amended in 1874. In re Frost, 6 Biss. 213; 9 Fed. Cas. 965.

After an adjudication in involuntary bankruptcy had been made by default, the bankrupts asked that the default be opened, and that they be allowed to answer on the ground that the required number of petitioners had not signed. Upon a reference, this allegation was found to be untrue, and the motion to set aside the proceedings was denied. In re Le Favour, 8 Ben. 43; 15 Fed. Cas. 244.

In determining whether the required number of petitioners had united in a petition against a separate partner, creditors of the firm must be included in the computation. In re Lloyd, 15 N. B. R. 257; 15 Fed. Cas. 711.

Justice Bradley held that the Act of 1867 did not require that in an adjudication the court should pass formally upon the question whether the required number and amount of creditors had united in a petition. Lastrapes et al. v. Blanc et al., 3 Woods, 134; 14 Fed. Cas. 1164.

Creditors having security are not to be considered in determining whether a sufficient number have signed an involuntary petition. In re Green Pond R. Co., 13 N. B. R. 118; 10 Fed. Cas. 1178.

An adjudication in bankruptcy is a judgment that the required number and amount of creditors have joined in the petition, and the question will not be reopened unless fraud or imposition is shown. In re Funkenstein, 3 Saw. 605; 9 Fed. Cas. 1005.

In determining whether the petitioners are sufficient in number and amount, attaching creditors cannot be taken into account. In re Jewett, 7 Biss. 242; 13 Fed. Cas. 584.

In proceedings of involuntary bankruptcy an allegation in the petition that the required number of creditors have signed is not jurisdictional, and may be amended during proceedings for a composition. Ex parte Jewett, 2 Low. 393; 13 Fed. Cas. 580.

Creditors who have been fraudulently preferred are not to be counted in determining whether a sufficient number had joined in a petition. In re Israel, 3 Dill. 511; 13 Fed. Cas. 175.

Under the amendment of 1874, a denial that a sufficient number of cred

itors had joined in the petition should be verified by the oath of the alleged bankrupt. The question should then be determined by a reference, and the affirmative of the allegation is with the petitioning creditor. The debtor must attend and submit to an examination if desired by the creditors. In re Hines, 7 Ben. 427; 12 Fed. Cas. 1136.

For the purpose of determining whether the required number of petitioners bave signed, and whether secured creditors have provable debts, the court may inquire into the value of securities in the hands of creditors. In re California P. R. Co., 3 Saw. 240; 4 Fed. Cas. 1061.

A suggestion that a sufficient number of creditors have not joined in a petition of involuntary bankruptcy will be entertained though it comes from a creditor who is charged with having received a fraudulent preference. Clinton et al. v. Mayo, 12 N. B. R. 39; 5 Fed. Cas. 1057.

In determining the sufficiency of the signers to a petition, secured debts and debts barred by the statute of limitations should not be included. In the case of debts partly secured, the amount of the security must be deducted, and so with the offsets. In re Bouton, 5 Saw. 427; 3 Fed. Cas. 1019.

The claim of a creditor who has received a fraudulent preference will be left out of the computation in determining whether the required number of creditors had joined in the petition. Clinton et al. v. Mayo, 12 N. B. R. 39; 5 Fed. Cas. 1057.

Where a question arises whether a sufficiency of creditors have joined in the petition, the better practice is to refer the matter to a register or United States commissioner to examine the proofs and to report thereon. In re Sargent, 13 N. B. R. 144; 21 Fed. Cas. 495 (1875).

The petition in bankruptcy must affirmatively show that the requisite number of creditors in number and amount have united therein. The bankrupt law is a stringent provision for taking a man's business for his creditors. If creditors wish to do this, they must do it on the terms of the bankrupt law. In re Scammon, 6 Chi. Leg. News, 328; 21 Fed. Cas. 617 (1874); 6 Biss. 145; 21 Fed. Cas. 620 (1874); id. 622 (1874).

Attaching creditors were held to be on the same footing with other secured or preferred creditors, and not entitled to participate in the proceedings until an assignee is elected, nor to be included in the computation of the number and amount required to be represented in the petition. In re Scrafford, 4 Dill. 376; 21 Fed. Cas. 866 (1877).

It is strictly a jurisdictional question whether the required number of creditors have joined in the petition. In re Henderson, 9 Fed. Rep. 196. It is made the duty of the court to investigate and find whether a sufficient number of creditors have joined. An allegation in the petition that such is the case, though admitted by the debtor, is not sufficient. In re Scammon, 6 Chi. Leg. News, 328; 21 Fed. Cas. 617 (1874); 6 Biss. 145; 21 Fed. Cas. 620 (1874); id. 622 (1874).

When the petitioners fail to prosecute proceedings in involuntary bankruptcy, any other creditors may intervene and conduct them to a conclusion, though an application for leave to dismiss is pending. In re Buchanan, 10 N. B. R. 97; 4 Fed. Cas. 527.

After filing a petition in involuntary bankruptcy against a debtor, the petitioning creditors made a settlement with him. On the day fixed for the hearing, other creditors were thereupon allowed to appear and proceed with the case. Ex parte Calendar, 5 Law Rep. 125; 4 Fed. Cas. 1044 (1843).

The court held that in determining whether a petition represents the necessary amount of indebtedness to the petitioning creditor, the interest might be added to the principal. Sloan v. Lewis, 22 Wall. 150.

After adjudication, the bankrupt and a creditor filed separate petitions that the proceedings be set aside on the ground that the required number and amount of creditors had not joined in the original petition. It was held that the judgment entered on the return day that the required number had signed was final in the absence of fraud or collusion. In re McKinley, 7 Ben. 562; 16 Fed. Cas. 218.

There should be an allegation in a petition in involuntary bankruptcy that the petitioners believe that they constitute the required number of creditors. If the required number have not in fact joined, owing to the refusal of the bankrupt to make a statement of his accounts upon demand, and a sufficient number join later, the proceedings will not be set aside. Perrin & Gaff M. Co. et al. v. Peale, 17 N. B. R. 377; 19 Fed. Cas. 230.

A creditor who held a lien by attachment which would be avoided by the adjudication, filed a petition asking leave to defend, and alleging, among other things, that the required number of creditors had not joined. It was ordered that the alleged bankrupt be required to file a list of creditors. Anon., 11 Chi. Leg. News, 190; 1 Fed. Cas. 995.

A corporation could be adjudged a bankrupt under section 5122, R. S. Section 12 of the Act of 1874, as to the number of creditors joining in petition, was held not to apply to proceedings against corporations. In re Oregon Bulletin, Printing & Pub. Co., 13 N. B. R. 199; 8 Chi. Leg. News, 81; 18 Fed. Cas. 770 (1875).

The district court having determined that the claim of the petitioning creditor equals the required amount, such determination is conclusive that a debt of that amount is due against a collateral attack. Sloan v. Lewis, 22 Wall. 150.

Individual, as well as firm creditors, should be taken into account in determining whether the required number had joined in a petition. In re Matot et al., 16 N. B. R. 485; 16 Fed. Cas. 1109.

The court of bankruptcy can only secure jurisdiction of the bankrupt and his estate by a petition clearly showing that the required number and amount of creditors have united, and a defect in this respect cannot be cured by amendment. In re Rosenfields, 11 N. B. R. 86; 20 Fed. Cas. 1209.

A creditor who had a lien on a bankrupt's property by attachment bought the claim of the petitioning creditor in bankruptcy, and obtained an order from the court dismissing the proceedings upon the payment of costs. Before the costs were paid, another creditor asked to be substituted for the petitioning creditor, and to have the dismissal vacated.