Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/800

 TSS FESEBAIi BEPOBTEB. �TÎntary caseSj where the petitioïj itself sets 'fbrth .ail the facts material to the claim made by the creaitora to an adjudica- tion.: ;.■■'■' �In lEx parte Jewett, supra, Judge Lowell repudiates the idea that the jurisdietion of the court is involved in the proper verification of the petition, or of the claims of the petition- ing creditera. He saya: "The district court has jurisdietion in bankruptcy of every person, residing within the district, who owes $300 of provable debts ; and when a paper which purports to be a petition in bankruptcy, and which alleges such residence and indebtedness, is filed, and an order of no- tice has been duly served, there is and can be no jurisdic- tional fact remaining, if the residence and indebtedness to the extent of $300 are admitted. The court may then pro- ceed to allow or refuse amendments, or anything else proper for a court to do that has undoubted jurisdietion of the sub- ject-matter and the parties." �In.re D, W. Gitckell, supra, the same question arosebefore Judge Blatchford -which is presented bere, and vas urged as a grouhd for dismissing tlje proceedings. . It waa an involun- tàry case. ^ '■ Tie- petition '\vsa8 filed on the twenty-fif th of Feb- ruàry, 1875, ibefore theëctt ôï Augiist' 15, 1876, became a law. There was.à 'default on the rettirn of the rùle to show cause. An adjudication wàsi ordered, and an assignee regu- larly appointed,- who proceëd«d to administer the estate. In thamohth'of NoYember follbwing a crediter presented to the coïtrt a petition, praying that ihe adjudication of bankruptcy and the proceedings thexeunder be vaeated, for theireason that the original • petition had- been verified before a notary public, an officer not thenqualified to perform such an act. The learned judge, .speaking. of the verification of the petition by a notary public, said : "'This was irregular, but the irreg- ularity did not affect the jurisdietion of the court. If, before the adjudication wasentered, the irregularity had beenbrought to the notice of the court, it could and would have been rem- edied. But the question as to whether the petition is verified before a proper officer is one of practice and not of jurisdic- ����