Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1847-03-11

waived the motion 10 dismiss, upon an agreement '"
have the case continued.
There wos another road case continued under the
same circumstances.
There were two petitions 10 set aside leves oil exe'
cuons-granted.
This completed the regular business OF inc 'e,m'
leaving some eight ten cases undsposed Of. 'uuge
Reded delivered two opinions on cases argued al Tue
last term The cases are Of themselves OF great pfac
teal Importance to the whole business community as
being the first and only Of the kind ever decided
in this State The opinions eyinced very great re-
search and were characterized by great ability, and al
though long, they were listened TO with the most
btea,hlcss attention We can only give but little more
than the result, which we do below.
c. Vash5urn and Others Bank Of Beltoies FaAs
and others.
This was bill in Chancery brought by the credit
ors Of Lawion Co., to secure preference out oil the
partnership effects over the creditors Of one Of the hm
who had previously attached the partnership properly
Il was argued at the last iemb by w. e. Bradley lot
Plaintiffs, with whom was Il. Tyler, and for the De-
PENDANTS by A. Reyes.
REDriELD j.. after stating the facts, SAID the onY
question was shall partnership creditors have peie
renee out Of the partnership effects. and about thh
/ there is no question by the English law. PRIVATE
creditors can only sell execution The interest Of lh
partnerin the partnership effects after the settlement
of the partnership and the payment Of its debts. Thus
4 IL might be- that nothing would pass by the SALE
This rule Is long settled and undoubed, and is sup
ported by numerous authorities. The rule was diner
entbefore Lord Mansfield and the partners share .
proportion in the goods themselves might be snd with
out relrenceto the condition Of the partnership, an
th, was the rule adopted by this Court atlaw in Rec
vs. shepanlson. But this was not intended 10 aiee
the equity Of the partners, who have right to ins'
that the partnership effects shall pay the debts Of h
partnership, both by the English and the civil law
The creditors depend upon the equity Of the partner
who have a lien upon the funds put in by each par
e ner for the payment Of the joint debts.
These rights Of the partners, and through them
the creditors, are not only recognized in England b
i in all the States save Pennsylvania and Georgia, az
we mus, follow the decisions with the soundness
5, which we are satisfied. The private creditors mu
therefore be postponed the partnership creditors wi
Is must take pro raiG.
/ Otis Bard,oeH rs. George Perry and others.
n This was a bin brought by the Plaintiff, creditor
l. Peck of the firm Of Bellows & Peck, Of Walpoe
e H. to secure preference out Of the effects OF Pee
over the defendants, creditors Of the partnership, VI
first attached the property nqucsiion. The parn'
ship were bankrupt and 50 were the individual mel
d bers.
re The case was argued last term by w. c. 81 adj
"a for Plaintiffs, and c. Walker for Defendants.
OF REDFIELD }. II might be supposed 10 follow ir'
oil the decision in Wtsaburn al VS.. Bellows Falls Ba
et al that the private creditors would be entitled TO
I'd GRITTY out Of private effects. Equity will compel pa
n nershp creditors TO first exhaust the partnership fun
e. but f there joint funds will not interfere.
he Debts Of lie partnership are in their nature both 10
10 and several and each partner IS liable for the VIII
% debt, and there is good ground for enforcing
" preference in favor Of private creditors So far
II has been done in England it has grown out Of th
IL bankrupt laws and the rules Of equity have been ma
~ 10 bend to these laws and there the Of
Ill v,vne. ~ Noble ba. overturned such nrerrence,
ak Decree-Bl Dismissed.