bankruptcy will deal summarily with attorneys' fees, and require them to pay over any excess retained by them. In re Brinker et al., 19 N. B. R. 195; 4 Fed. Cas. 143.

Under the Act of 1841, a claim of solicitors for services and expenses in obtaining the discharge of a voluntary bankrupt would not be paid out of the assets; but Justice Story expressed the opinion that a petitioner in involuntary proceedings might be so reimbursed. Ex parte Hale et al, 5 Law Rep. 403; 11 Fed. Cas. 179 (1842).

A petitioning creditor in involuntary bankruptcy is entitled to reimbursement for a reasonable attorney's fee incurred and paid in prosecuting the proceedings, and it should be paid before a dividend is made among the creditors. No such preference exists for expenses incurred in attending the court. In re King, 4 Biss. 319; 14 Fed. Cas. 503.

Prior to the election of the assignee, several suits had been commenced against the bankrupt in which attorneys employed by him had rendered services more or less beneficial to the estate, and they presented a bill to the assignee for such services, which was paid by him. The disbursement was disallowed in the settlement of the assignee's accounts under general order 30, Act of 1867. In re Hamberger et al., 8 Ben. 189; 11 Fed. Cas. 317.

The court refused to allow an assignee for professional services as counsel rendered by the assignee's son, holding that such counsel must be regarded as acting on behalf of his father as an individual. In re New York Mail Steamship Co., 1 Chi. Leg. News, 210; 18 Fed. Cas. 156. No charges should be allowed against the assets in the hands of the assignees for professional services of counsel rendered prior to the appointment of the assignees. Ibid.

An attorney for a debtor who had resisted an adjudication in involuntary bankruptcy was held to be entitled to fees out of the estate; and it was further held that he should be allowed the sum paid by the petitioning creditors to their attorney. In re Portsmouth Sav. Fund Soc., 2 Hughes, 239; 19 Fed. Cas. 1087.

Attorneys appeared for the bankrupt to procure the discharge of an order of arrest, and subsequently prepared the schedule and inventory. The court held that a moderate compensation could be allowed them for these services, but that the better practice is for the bankrupts to apply to the court for leave to employ counsel before incurring expense to be charged against the estate. In re Mansfield et al., 6 Ben. 284; 16 Fed. Cas. 659.

Compensation of counsel for the petitioning creditor is taxable as costs in cases of involuntary bankruptcy, but the petitioning creditors have no right to enforce contribution for payment of counsel to an extent beyond the assets realized. The petitioning creditor takes the chances, and should he fail to obtain a decree of bankruptcy or to discover assets he must bear the burden alone. In re O'Hara, Am. Law Reg. (N. S.) 113; 18 Fed. Cas. 622.

Services of counsel in opposing petitions to have a party adjudged an

involuntary bankrupt are not allowable as charges against the assignee; such services are individual claims against the bankrupt and provable in bankruptcy. In re New York Mail Steamship Co., 2 N. B. R. 554; 18 Fed. Cas. 157 (1869).

While an attorney of a receiver appointed by a state court for an insolvent corporation may be paid for such services as benefited and preserved the estate of the corporation, and were not hostile to the proceedings in bankruptcy, he cannot be paid for services rendered in seeking to maintain the authority of the state court as against the jurisdiction of the court of bankruptcy. Platt v. Archer, 13 Blatchf. 351; 19 Fed. Cas. 834.

A question having arisen as to a claim presented by the bankrupt's attorney for services and expenses, it was held that the assignee should bring the matter before the court by petition, whereupon a reference would be ordered. In re Rosenberg, 3 N. B. R. 73; 20 Fed. Cas. 1197.

The assets of the bankrupt amounted to $1,359, and the expenses to $721. Of this, $510 had been paid to the attorneys for costs and fees. The attorneys applied to the court for an additional allowance of $250. The court refused the application; and at the same time expressed the opinion, as the result of his observation, that creditors were commonly to blame for extravagance in the administration of bankrupt estates, first, by their carelessness in the selection of the assignee, and second, by their neglect to superintend his management of the business. In re Drake, 14 N. B. R. 150; 7 Fed. Cas. 1047.

The attorney of the petitioning creditors filed a bill for services and expenses that amounted to one-fourteenth of the entire assets. Chief Justice Chase reversed an order of the district court for the payment of the bill by the assignee, and at the same time said: "There can be no doubt where one or more creditors petition for and procure an adjudication of bankruptcy against a debtor, they may, on motion, be reimbursed for their reasonable expenses. The fund is the fruit of the diligence of such creditors, and it would be manifestly unjust to compel them to bear alone the expenses incurred for the benefit of all." In re Mitteldorfer, Chase, 288; 17 Fed. Cas. 537.

Wages Due to Workmen, Etc.

Under the laws of Maine, the assignee was ordered to pay $50 for the services of a minor within six months next preceding the first publication of a notice of proceedings in bankruptcy, upon proof of the claim by his father. In re Harthorn, 4 N. B. R. 103; 11 Fed. Cas. 705.

The Act of 1841 gave preference to servants for personal services. The court held that this would not cover money loaned to pay such wages. In re Paulson, 19 Fed. Cas. 4.

A sum due an apprentice for overwork was held to be entitled to a preference, under the Act of 1841, as wages due an operative." Ex parte Steiner, 22 Fed. Cas. 1234.

Orders for goods drawn in favor of the bankrupt's employees were held not to be preferred claims in the hands of the drawees within the Act of 1867 or the laws of Pennsylvania. In re Erie R. M. Co., 1 Fed. Rep. 585.

Laborers had assigned their claims for wages to L., who had advanced money on them. Held, under section 27 of the Act of 1867, that the claims were entitled to preference. In re Brown, 4 Ben. 142; 4 Fed. Cas. 327. A bankrupt made a composition and resumed business. Later the composition was set aside, and he was adjudged a bankrupt. Held, that an employee was entitled to a preferred claim for wages out of the estate for labor performed while the composition was in force. In re Wells, 4 Fed. Rep. 68.

The Act of 1867 (section 5101, R. S.) gave a priority for wages "for labor performed," etc. It was held that this would not cover the case of a claimant who had been employed for a year at a fixed salary, and was discharged at the expiration of six months owing to the suspension of the bankrupts. In re Pebear et al., 17 N. B. R. 461; 19 Fed. Cas. 405.

Miscellaneous.

A creditor who enjoys the benefit of priority must take it cum onere. Brown v. Jefferson Co. Bank, 9 Fed. Rep. 258.

A judgment creditor has no priority, and will share pro rata with other creditors in the distribution of the proceeds of a promissory note. In re Erwin et al., 3 N. B. R. 580; 8 Fed. Cas. 779.

When it is sought to have money in the hands of the assignee appropriated to the payment of a claim alleged to have priority, the proper proceeding is a suit under section 2 of the Act of 1867. Hurst v. Teft, 12 Blatchf. 217; 12 Fed. Cas. 1044.

When the goods of a consignor were sold by the bankrupt prior to the proceedings, and the proceeds mingled with the assets, he stands in the same position as other creditors. In re Coan & Ten Broeke M. Co., 6 Biss. 315; 5 Fed. Cas. 1112.

A person who has delivered money to a banker to pay a note when it is received is in no better position than any other creditor when the banker becomes bankrupt. In re Hosie, 7 N. B. R. 601; 12 Fed. Cas. 520.

Private banks who had received certain notes for collection and collected them, failed to pay the owner the proceeds and subsequently be came bankrupt. It was decided by Judge Dillon that the owner was in no better position than any other creditor. Bank of Commerce v. Russell, 2 Dill. 215; 2 Fed. Cas. 647; In re Bank of Madison, 5 Biss. 515; 2 Fed. Cas. 657.

A law of the state provided that the assets of an insolvent bank should be applied first to the payment of sums deposited with it by savings banks. Held, that this provision gave a savings bank no prior lien, and that it must share with general creditors. Sixpenny Savings Bank v. Estate of Stuyvesant Bank, 12 Blatchf. 179; 22 Fed. Cas. 264.

The business of the bankrupts was continued in the name of the bankrupt firm under the direction of a committee. A dealer was informed by the committee that all debts incurred after the composition would be paid in full before any payment was made on the old indebtedness, and on that assurance, sold goods to the firm. The assets having been depreciated in value while in the hands of the committee, it was held that the dealer was not entitled to payment in full in preference to the old creditors. In re Brightman et al., 18 N. B. R. 566; 4 Fed. Cas. 138.

The bankrupt had a trust fund in his hands amounting to about $1,500 which he had deposited in bank with his own funds. Finding that he was insolvent, he drew out $1,500 from his individual account and deposited it to the credit of himself as trustee. Two months afterward he was adjudged bankrupt. The court held that while this was a technical preference, still the beneficiaries under the trust, and he as their representative, might have a trust declared. The court said: "Prove what trust money has been paid in, and what of the bankrupt's money and when, and prove what has been drawn out and when; then, by striking the account at any time, you will find how the balance in the bank is to be apportioned, because you will see how that balance originated, whether from trust money or not, or in what proportions. I approve that method of settlement. The bankrupt may state the account, and ascertain how much, if any, of the money transferred on the 29th of February, 1876, was trust money according to the method above mentioned; and for that sum he may retain the deposit. For any deficiency, he, as trustee, must take a dividend concurrently with his general creditors out of the general assets." Ex parte Hobbs; In re Hapgood, 2 Low. 491; 12 Fed. Cas. 260. [For additional notes pertinent to this section, see §§ 63 and 67.]

DIVIDENDS.

§ 65. Declaration and Payment of Dividends.- (a) Dividends of an equal per centum shall be declared and paid on all allowed claims, except such as have priority or are secured.

(b.) The first dividend shall be declared within thirty days after the adjudication, if the money of the estate in excess of the amount necessary to pay the debts which have priority and such claims as have not been, but probably will be, allowed equals five per centum or more of such allowed claims. Dividends subsequent to the first shall be declared upon like terms as the first and as often as the amount shall equal ten per centum or more and upon closing the estate. Dividends may be declared oftener and in smaller proportions if the judge shall so order.

(c.) The rights of creditors who have received dividends, or in whose favor final dividends have been declared, shall not be affected by the

proof and allowance of claims subsequent to the date of such payment er declarations of dividends; but the creditors proving and securing the allowance of such claims shall be paid dividends equal in amount to those already received by the other creditors if the estate equals so much before such other creditors are paid any further dividends.

(d.) Whenever a person shall have been adjudged a bankrupt by a court without the United States and also by a court of bankruptcy. creditors residing within the United States shall first be paid a dividend equal to that received in the court without the United States by other creditors before creditors who have received a dividend in such courts shall be paid any amounts.

(e.) A claimant shall not be entitled to collect from a bankrupt estate any greater amount than shall accrue pursuant to the provisions of this Act.

§ 66. Unclaimed Dividends.— (a.) Dividends which remain unclaimed for six months after the final dividend has been declared shall be paid by the trustee into court.

(b.) Dividends remaining unclaimed for one year shall, under the direction of the court, be distributed to the creditors whose claims have been allowed but not paid in full, and after such claims have been paid in full the balance shall be paid to the bankrupt: Provided, That in case unclaimed dividends belong to minors such minors may have one year after arriving at majority to claim such dividends.

When the declaration of a dividend on a claim was unauthorized, the assignee may withhold payment. In re Herrick, 13 N. B. R.; 12 Fed. Cas. 42.

The register had no power, under the Act of 1867, to reopen a dividend already declared for the purpose of paying a claim which had not then been proved. In re Smith, 15 N. B. R. 97; 22 Fed. Cas. 403.

As a general rule, where a fund is in the custody of the law, and cannot be paid out without an order of the court, it does not bear interest. Bowman v. Wilson, 12 Fed. Rep. 864.

The court will not compel an assignee to pay a dividend to a creditor who is a debtor to a member of the bankrupt firm, before the determination of a suit to recover the claim. Atkinson v. Kellogg, 10 N. B. R. 535; 2 Fed. Cas. 104.

After an order for a distribution of dividends has been made, a creditor cannot come in, prove up his debt and participate in the dividend. In re Miller, 1 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 180; 17 Fed. Cas. 298.

When only one creditor has proved his claim, he must be paid in full if there are sufficient funds for the purpose; and if there is a balance, it