Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/659

 644 FEDERAL REPORTER. �the proceeda of the sale of the real estate ol the bankrupt, upon whioh they were liens. �John McCleery and Samuel Linn, for appellant. �Joshtia Cromley and J. 0. Parsons, for appellees. �McKbnnan, C. J. It is urged by the counsel of the appellees that this court ought not to take cognizance of these cases, because the order of the district court is not subject to appeal, and I cannot say that the objection is without force. �By the order of the bankruptey court the real estate of the bank- rupt was sold discharged of liens, and, of course, the proceeds of the sale were substituted for the land, as security for the liens upon it. The appellees held judgments against the bankrupt which were apparently liens upon the real estate sold, and therefore applied to the court for an order directing the payment of their judgments out of the fund produced by the sale. The assignee opposed this appli- cation upon the ground that the judgments of the appellees were fraudaient preferences under the bankrupt act, but notwithstanding Hs objection the court made the orders prayed for; and it is from these orders that these appeals have been taken. �Although the subject-matter of the objection is within the juris- diction of the court, yet the method of asserting it was inappropriate and unwarranted. It had nothing of the formai character of a suit in equity, by which alone the objection could be effectively urged. The judgments were apparently valid, and the only mode of contest- ing thia andof avoiding them isby a complaiat in equity and a decree, v?hich might be the subject of appeal to either the circuit or thf supreme coijrt. From the resuit of .any other form of proceeding or adjudication no appeal is provided by any clause of the bankrupt act. I might, therefore, decline to consider the merits of the contest, which have been very fully discussed by counsel. But I think the orders of the district court were properly made, even considering the grounds of objection set up by the assignee. In January, 1876, the bankrupt gave to Dougal a warrant to confess judgment against him, and on the thirteenth of March, 1877, a like warrant was given to Baker; and, in pursuance of these warrants, judgments were confessed and entered in April, 1877. The proceeding in bankruptey was com- menced on the seventeenth of May, 1877. Although, then, the judg- ments were entered within two months before the commencement of proceedings in bankruptey, yet it bas been held, and is now the well-settled law, that the warrants upon which the judgments were confessed must be given within the two months fixed by the bankrupt ��� �