IN EE KBLLT. 219 �■a, state of the case would change or affect the legal right of complainant to enforce payment of a certain proportion of the deficiency judgment, the court will, if desired, hereafter hear counsel upon the question. Exceptions sustained. ���In THE Matter oï Kellt, Bankrupt. (District Court, D. Kentuckff. June, 1880.) 1. Baitkrttptct — Petition foe Dischabqe— Failtjee to Prosbcuth. �In Bankruptoy. �Baer, D. J. In this case Caleb Kelly filed bis petition, to be adjudged a bankrupt, on the second of May, 1878, and was 80 adjudged on the tenth of May, 1878. �He reported some encumbered real estate and a little Per- sonal property, but ail seems to have been set apart to him under the exemption laws. �The bankrupt filed his petition for a diseharge February 15, 1879, and at the meeting some of his creditors opposed his discharge, and filed grounds why the discharge should not be granted. No further action seems to have been taken by the bankrupt. Berry, Jones & Hiter, creditors, vrho had proven their claims, filed a petition in this court October 8, 1879, asking to be allowed to pursue their legal reme- dies in the state courts against the bankrupt. This court, on an ex parte hearing of said petition, declined to enter such an order, but directed a rule to be issued against the bankrupt, returnable July 6, 1880, to show cause, if any he had, why he did not prosecute his cause and ask for his discharge. �The rule bas been returned executed, and still the bankrupt bas made no response, nor has he taken any further stepa in his cause. I therefore direct the order to be entered : �In re Caleb Kelly, Bankrupt. �The bankrupt having failed to prosecute his cause with iîiligence, and failed to show cause why be does not prosecute, ����
