}oca,Ilaw, shall not prevent 80 di8.Charge in involuntary cases,
strongly oonfirms the views of the court above referred to and followed, as to the effect of such a general assignment in preventing a in a case of voluntary bankruptcy likethe present. It is immaterial that the bankrupt, before making the assignment, consulted with some of his creditors and was advised by them to make an assignment. So far as these opposing creditors are concerned, the evidence shows before he consulted them he had already determined to make an assignment; nor did they do any act, by advising him or otherwise, which should preclude them from insisting on this objection to his discharge. The sixth specification is therefore Bustained. The others are overruled as not proven. Discharge rMused.
.and others, Bankrupts.
(District Court, 8. D. New York. --,1880.)
BANKRUPTCy-ATTACHMENT.-Money in the hands of an assignee in bankruptcy cannot be reached by attachment. In re Cunningham, 19 N. B. R. 276.
In Bankruptcy. J. A. Seaman, for petitioner. W. F. Scott, for assignee. E. R Olcott, for Planters' National Bank. CHOATE, D. J. This is an application for an order on the assignee to pay a dividend to the petitioner, who, by order duly made, has been subrogated to the rights of a creditor whose has been, after conteilt, established as proved. T.heanswer of the assignee shows that before the dividend was actually declared, but after the meeting at which it was declared was called, he was served with a wa,rrant of attachment against the original creditor, issued by a state court, in an action brought against that creditor by the Planters' National
;JOSEPH DIXON ;<mUCIBLE 00. V. BENHAM.
Bank of Augusta, Georgia, upon a judgment reco'vered in the circuit court of the United States for the district of South Carolina. The assignee declined to pay the dividend to the petitioner without a special order of the court. In the case of Kohlsaat, 18 N. B. R. 570, it was held that the payment of moneys, payable under a composition in bankruptcy, could not be interfered wi by proceedings in a state court. In the case of Cunningham, 19 N. B. R. 276, the question whether dividends in the hands of an assignee can be attached, was very carefully examined by Judge Love, and it was held that they could not be attached even after the dividend was declared. The case of Dunlap v. Ins. 00., 74 N. Y. 145, seems not inconsistent with these cases. The petitioner is entitled to the order on the ground that the money in the hands of the assignee could not be reached by attachment. Motion granted.
10SEPH DIXON CRUCIBLE.
(Oircuit Oourt, D. Oonnecticut. November 22, 1880.)
1. TRADE-MARK-WRAPPERS AID> LABELS-STOVE POLISlL
In Equity. Morris W. Seymour, for plaintiff. H. C. Baldwin, for defendant. SHIPMAN, D. J. This is a bill in equity, brought by So citi. ll;en of the state of New Jersey against a citizen of the state of Connecticut, to restrain the defendant from the use of the plaintiff's trade-mark, and for an account. Thetrade-mark had never been registered in pursuance of any act of Congress. Joseph Dixon commenced the manufacture of stove polish· in Taunton, Massachusetts, at least as early as in the year 1840, and was· engaged in the business until 1868, either alone or as a member of the firm of Joseph Dixon & Co. He