Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/908

 896 FEDERAL REPORTER. �an order requiring the marshal to release 12 wagons and 18 barrels of sait from the levy of the writ in his hands, and turn the same over to the custody of the deputy sheriff, npon the ground that the latter officer exeouted the first attachment on the same. The petition is contested by the other attaching creditors and the defendant in the writs. �The writs of attachment in the hands of the marshal and deputy sheriff respectively have been introduced in evidence. The returns on both writs show on their face a valid levy. From the face of the returns it appears the marshal levied on the property at 5 o'clock p. m., and that the deputy sheriff levied on the same property at 6 : 30 o'clock p. m. of the same day. Each officer testifies to the correctness of his return, and the deputy sheriff testifies that he made his levy nearly an hour before the arrivai of the train whieh brought the deputy marshal to the town where the property was found. In the view takenof the case it is notnecessary to determine which one of these ofËcers is right in his recollection as to the time he cast a furtive glance after night on the property. It turns out that neither of them knew what constituted a valid levy of a writ of attachment on personal property, and neither of them made an effectuai levy on the night in question, whether the property be regarded as capable of manual delivery or otherwise. �The deputy sheriff testifies that the property was on an unenclosed lot in the rear of the storehouse of the defendant in the attachment ; that it was dark at the time he went where the property was found ; that no one was in the storehouse or about the promises ; that the storehouse was locked and the key in the possession of the deputy marshal, but not the dep- uty who afterwards levied the writ on the wagons and sait; that by the light of a burning match he ascertained the maker's name on the wagons and went away, and afterwards indorsed his return upou the writ. He did not take the prop- erty into his custody, or remove it, or put it in the custody of any one, or procure a receiptor for it. He did not even bave the agreement of the debtor that it might remain where it was without interference. He did absolutely nothing but go ����