1810. Ex parte CORSON, This is a Point of very great Importance, and has never, in fact, occurred before; when a joint Creditor takes out the Commission, he is considered as a separate Creditor, DE TASTET.and is the only joint Creditor who can come in with the In the Matter of separate Creditors, and receive Dividends with them (a): this is a singular State of the Law; Rimmer would have been a joint Creditor if he had not handed over these Bills; and Warren and Bruce hold them only as a Security for £420; which Bills, if they had not come into their Hands, would not, as against the separate Creditors, have been admitted to be proved, and, when they have received what is due on the Bills, they will have received all that is due to them. But they are the legal Holders: the Bills of Exchange will be discharged by Operation of the Certificate, and they must be considered as Trustees. It is, in truth, introducing two joint Creditors: I have considered it again and again, and particularly the Judgment Er parte Crisp, in Willes' Reports (b), and am of Opinion, that the legal Right must decide the Question; as the Commission is in the Nature of an Execution for a legal Debt, all the Consequences attached to that must follow; they must take their legal Dividends, and, as to the Trust afterwards, the Commissioners have nothing to do with it. (a) Ex parte Taitt, 16 Ves. 193. Ex parte Dewdney, 15 Ves. 499. Ex parte Ackerman, 14 Ves. 604. Ex parte Chand ler, 9 Ves. 35. Ex parte Hall, (b) Ex parte Crisp, Cooke's 1810. August. having issued in Ex parte PERRY AND ANOTHER.In the Matter of A Commission ROWTON and Morrall were Bankers at Shrewsbury and at Chester; and, on the 26th of September, 1810, London against 4. and B.Bank- a Commission of Bankrupt issued against them in London, ers at Shrews- under which they were duly found and declared Bankrupts. bury and Ches- The Petitioners, John Perry, of Chester, and Samuel ter, auxiliary Hartshorn, of Shrewsbury, on behalf of themselves and Commissions all other the Creditors of the Bankrupts, holding their directed to issue small Promissory Notes, prayed, that two auxiliary Comto those Places, missions might issue; one to be executed at Shrewsbury, for the purpose and the other at Chester, for the purpose of receiving the of taking the Proofs of Cre- Proof of such Debts. ditors holding Notes, under £20. Ordered accordingly and it was directed, that the Commissioners should be at liberty to receive Proofs for Debts under £20 only; such Proofs to be received as Proofs under the London Commission, to which the two other Commissions were to be merely auxiliary. S. P. but Li Ex parte SCOTT.-In the Matter of JUKES, THE HE Bankrupts were Bankers at Gosport. Two Commissions had issued against them, one at Gosport, mine the Bank- and the other in London. On an Application to supersede berty to exa rupt under such the Gosport Commission, the Gosport Commission, a similar Order was made as in auxiliary Comthe preceding Case. mission, re fused. Mr. 1810. Er parte SCOTT.In the Mr. Hart, for the Gosport Creditors, pressed for liberty to examine the Bankrupts under the auxiliary Commission, which the Lord CHANCELLOR refused, observing, that such Examination would be nugatory; and that the Creditors at Gosport might easily instruct an Agent in JUKES, LANGLondon to conduct an Examination for them. Matter of LEY, and Ex parte HALL AND ANOTHER-In the Matter of Exfite Rhodes THE PALMER. VIE Petitioners in this Case carried on Business as A. obtains Factors in London, under the Firm of John Hall Money from B. and Co.; and also in America, under the Firm of Fleming on the Security and Hall. Palmer, the Bankrupt, was in the Habit of of Goods conoccasionally consigning Goods to the House of Fleming signed to B.'s and Hall, in America, which Goods were sold by them, rica,and shortly House in Ame after becomes and of the Bank and the Proceeds remitted to Palmer. Some Time in the £2000, 1810. Ex parte HALL and Another.-In the Matter of PALMER. £2000, on Account of the said Goods. Palmer delivered the Bills to a Person to get them accepted, who handed them over to the Petitioners; they had got them accepted; but Payment had been refused when due, on account of the want of Palmer's Indorsement. The Petitioners prayed that they might be declared entitled to the Bills, and might be permitted to use the Name or Names of Palmer or his Assignees, in bringing Actions on them against the Acceptors, or that Palmer or his Assignees, or both of them, if necessary, might be directed to indorse them (a). Mr. Cullen, in support of the Petition, and for Costs, cited Ex parte Dumas (b), Ex parte Oursell (c). Sir Samuel Romilly, and Mr. Giffin Wilson, for the Assignees. The Lord CHANCELLOR. Whatever might have been the Practice in Lord Hardwicke's Time, it has been admitted for these last Twentyfive Years, that there is no such Jurisdiction in Bankruptcy; it has been the usual Practice to make the Objection, and to submit at once; and I am well aware, how careful I ought to be in extending a Jurisdiction admitting (a) That a Bankrupt may, after Act of Bankruptcy, indorse a Bill delivered before for a bona fide Consideration, vide Esp. Ni. Prius, 30. Peake, N. P. c. 50. Selwyn 352. Ex parte Greening, 13 Ves. 206. That a Payee of an Accommodation Bill may indorse it. although it has been parted with after Act of Bankruptcy, and the Indorsee for a valuable Consideration recover on it against the Acceptor. Vide 1 Camp. N. P. Rep. 45. (b) 2 Ves. 586. 1 Atk. 232. (c) Amb. 297. Gpoke's B. L. 378. no 1810. Ex parte HALL and Another.-In no Appeal. I may interpose by Consent; and, if Parties, waiving the Benefit of the Objection, afterwards should refuse Obedience to the Orders, I would commit them: there are many Cases where the Court has Jurisdiction merely by Consent. This is not a Case where the Chan- the Matter of cellor is making Order for the Distribution of the Bankrupt's Property amongst the Creditors, but as to others, who are not bound to submit to the Jurisdiction. Lord Thurlow would not have entertained Jurisdiction for a Moment (a). PALMER. Petition dismissed with Costs. (a) Vide, Ex parte Rowton, post. Ex parte ROWTON.-In the Matter of BRICK WOOD. N the 6th July, 1810, Brickwood and Co. Bankers, A. and B. ON in London, stopped Payment, and a Commission of Bankers in LonBankrupt issued against them, under which they were don, have, at the found and declared Bankrupts. At the Time of their Time of their Bankruptcy, Cash and short Bills belonging to C. and D. Bankers in the Country. The Cash was the Excise Duties, received and remitted by the Country to the London Bankers, and against which they had given to the Commissioners the latter's Acceptances; in respect of these an Extent had issued. The Crown has a Right to elect against what Securities they will go, and on the Consent of the Attorney-General, the short Bills ordered to be delivered up. Whatever it is necessary to decide collaterally to the Point of Proof, will give Jurisdiction in Bankruptcy. stopping |