Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/84

 76 FBDBBAL BEPOBTEB. �tember 20, 1876, due on demand; a note for $759. e4, dated March 7, 1876, due in six months, and also a claim for three months' rent of store. The second judgment in favor of defendant Caswell, for $2,551.95, was entered upon a judg- ment note for $2,500, dated October 5, 1876, and due on demand; the judgment in faYor of Albert E. Coe, for $1,892, was entered upon a note for $1,800, dated July 3, 1876; the second judgment in favor of the same party, for $567.78, was entered upon a note for $500, dated February 28, 1876, and due in four months; the judgment in favor of Charlotte E. Coe, for $1,161.04, was entered upon a judgment note for $1,092.75, dated July 5, 1876, and dueinone day; the judg- ment in favor of Mrs. Benedict, for $3,987.75, was entered upon a judgment note for $1,000, dated June 12, 1875, due in one day, and another judgment note for $3,000, bearing the same date, and due in one year from date. �The suits in favor of the defendants Caswell on his $2,500 note, and Albert E. Coe on his $500 note, were commmenced October 12, 1876, and the other four suits were ail begun on the same day, namely, September 23, 1876. In ail the cases judgments were entered by default, and executions and le vies were at once and simultaneously issued and made. �The transfers of property by the bankrupt to Caswell, to secure demands not put in judgment, and which are also by this bill sought to be set aside, were respectively made Sep- tember 23 and October 28, 1876. �The execution levies upon the bankrupt's stock necessarily closed his business, and bankruptcy proceedings were insti- tuted against him on the sixteenth day of November, 1876. If the judgments, execution levies and transfers in questions are sustained, it is understood that they exhaust the entire assets of the bankrupt, except uncolleeted merchandise ae- counts, many of which are worthless ; and the great question in the case, and one which the court bas very carefully con- sidered, is, ought these judgments, levies and transfers, in the light of the facts and circumstances developed by the testi- mony, to stand as valid securities in favor of the defendants ? And this question is settled when it is determined whether or ��� �