The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1893-12-12

| 49, eAo NoAAhAO1 VI NOiQubd[y
assignments for the benefit of credi-
tors (Burrill on Assignments, 3S-4O),
but even then, person is considered
insolvent If the present inadeauacy
of the debtors means to satisfy his
engagements = even in connec-
ton with the probable fact of ulti-
mate solvency is itself a
matter of uncertainty, being depend
ent upon contingencies of various
kinds which cannot be foreseen or
estimated" or "where the property
OF the debtor is of doubtful char
aeter, and may or may not, according
to the circumstances, be sufficient to
discharge his debts in full" Id. Al.
Taking, then, this broad definition,
which is the most favorable to the
creditors, and supposing for the
sake of argument that this is the
kind of insolvency contemplated by
the statute, was w. H. Aldrich in
solvent at the date of his petitionl
His interest in his fathers estate
could not be divided directly among
his creditors at that time. The
estate was in course of administra-
ton in the probate court. His in
terest was only an equitable life
interest of uncertain amount. It
was not subject to execution. Or
could it even have been sold for
sufficient to pay the debts? Being
only a life interest (which itself is
of uncertain duration) in the net
income latter paying the uncertain
expenses OF the management of the
estate and of the education of
the children) of one-fourth of
the residue latter certain specific
devises and bequests) of an estate of
uncertain amount, in course of adj
ministration, and with numerous
conditions annexed to his interest,
the effect of which would be, to say
the least, uncertain until adiudieated
upon, who would be willing to pur-
chase it, and for how much No
has been made on the part |
of the creditors to show that w. II.
Aldrich could by any possibility, not
to say probability, have met his en-
gagements either in money or pro-
perty, or in any other way at the time |
be petitioned to be sdjudged a bank
rupt, end yet it is well settled that |
insolvency means only present in
ability to pay.
No attempt has been made to show
hat the alleged banEupt's inability
% pay has been the result of his own
wrong. On the contrary, the credit
)rs knew that he was without means,
md they gave him credit upon his
of what he was to re-
,eive under his fathers will, the time
% receive which had not, without
my wrong on his part, then arrived.
t is not claimed. and it certainly has
lot been proved that in obtaining
redit upon these expectations, the
lebtor acted fraudulently. If that
an be shown it will be good ground
or refusing the debtor his discharge.
Jor does it appear that the debtor,
n seeking bankruptcy, had any
7rongtul motive, other than that, il !
ny, which may be inferred from the
act, if fact it be, that his creditors
'ould thereby be placed in a worse
ondition than they otherwise would
9 in. The debtor claims to have
sken the bankruptcy proceedings in
RIDER to protect himself from the
ttacks of his creditors, his house
old furniture having been levied
pom in execution at the instance of
ne of them. This was reason enough
, Justify his course of action, and no :
.her reason or motive, if any ex-
ted, has been shown either di-
,ctly or inferentially. 1t does not
zen appear that, as a result of his
,tioD, whether right or wrongful,
3 will reap any other advantage
ian that to which he is lawfully en-
tied under the bankruptcy act, or
lat his creditors will suffer any !
jury. If the conditions annexed to "
s interest by the terms of the will =
q in the nature of limitations, his :,
terest would be determined either /
Z his bankruptcy or by an attach /
ent by a judgment creditor. In 1
Their case neither he nor his credi- 2
rs could reap any benefit from it. z
q the other hand, if the conditions z
g void as being merely conditions
pugnant to the estate devised, his
terest may be reached either by his s,
signee in bankruptcy or by judg- 10
ant creditors. In either case the 10
editors receive the benefit of it. 10
g Grares Q. Dolphin, l Sim, Sc; II
andon g. Robinson, Is Yes, 429; u
clifford Q. Hickman, 8 Hare, AIS; 10
e1ols q. Eaton, 81 US, 716; T'Rliag- %
It O. Bradford, 5 r. l., 205; 2 Jarm. "A
ills, 1881; Perry, Trusts, SEES. $50, II
J. Nor does it appear that a judg. il
mt creditor would be in any better {
sition than an assignee by reason
the property being in another PC
.isdiction (California)' If the prop ~
y can be reached at all, it can be
Iched, at least so far as it may be pr
-sonal property, by the assignee,
% acts in this respect not by virtue
his authority as an officer of the
L L L L L. l.