Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/916

 IN BE SHIELEY. 901 �Here the statute prohibits the use of a still for the purpose of distill- ing. This indictment charges an act sueh as is described in the statute, done for the purpose specified in the statute, and, consefjuently, charges the offence created by the statute. Blatchfobd, g. J., and Brown, D. J., concur. ���In re Shieley, Bankrupt. (DUtrict Court, W. D. Penntylvania. 1882.) �1. SEiztniE ON Execution Beporb the Filing of a Petition nr Bankruptct — Proving up Unpaid Balance — Eev. St. { 5075. �Where a judgment crediter issued an execution, and by virtue thereof the sherifl made a seizure of gooda before defendant's petition in banlcruptcy waa flled and sold them af ter his adjudication, hdd, that such crediter, after apply- ing the proceeds to his judgment, might prove any unpaid balance thereof ; the case not falling within the purview of the prohibitory clause of section 6075 of the Revised Statutes. �In Bankruptcy. Sur register's report disallowing proof of the claim of the Eaton, Cole & Burnham Company. �G. S. Croshy, and Jas. P. Coulter, for report. �W. S. Purviance, for exceptions. �AcHESON, D. J. On February i, 1878, the Eaton, Cole & Burn- ham Company, the plaintifif in a judgment against John T. Shirley, (the bankrupt,) in the court of common pleas of Armstrong county, issued thereon a, fi. fa., No. 214, March term, 1878, and placed the same in the hands of the sheriff. There was already in his hands a fi. fa., No. 213, March term, 1878, against the same defendant, issued upon the judgment of the Kittanning Insurance Company. The next day (February 5th) the sheriff, by virtue of both these writs otfi.fa., seized in execution personal property of the defendant, and advertised it for sale on the fourteenth of the same month. Eobert Gailey, Sr., another judgment creditor of Shirley, on February 5th issued a fi. fa., No. 218, March term, 1878, whieh came into the sheriff's hands the succeeding day. These facts appear from the exemplification of the common pleas record attached to the register's report, and an exemplification in Gailey's case on file in this bank- ruptcy number. �It is alleged there -were still other executions in the sheriff's hands, but of this we have not the proper evidence ; at least, we are without ��� �