320 FJBDBKAL BBPOBTER. �that such remedy is full, adequate, and complete, and that, therefore, the assignee in bankruptcy has no remedy in equity as against these respondents ; that there was no ground for making them parties to a bill for setting aside the assign- ment ; that they do net claim under the state assignee, but in hostility to him. It is further objected that no decree should be made against them, because they claim that the assignment was void under the laws of New York, and, there- fore, whether it was voidable under the bankrupt law or not, there was left in the bankrupt a title which, under the lawsof New York, could be reached by the levy of execution. And the particular grounds on which it is claimed that it was thus void are that at the time of the levy of the executions no schedules had been filed, and no bond given by the assignee ; that this last question of the validity of the assignment under the laws of New York is one which cannot be tried in this suit, but must be tried in a suit between the state assignee and the sheriff, which suit had been commenced before this suit was commenced. �It is further insisted that this case is distinguishable from the case of In re Biesenthal in this respect : that in that case the property in question on which a levy had been made, part of the assigned property, had not been sold by the sher- iff, but was afterwards Bold, by consent of the parties in the suit, to set aside the assignment, and the proceeds deposited in the registry of the court to abide the decision of the court in that suit as to the rights of the parties; so that there waa a fund in court in respect to which the court had jurisdiction to determine ail rights, or that the execution creditors were parties claiming a lien and interest adverse to the complain- ant in respect to the very property in controversy between the assignee in bankruptcy and the state assignee in the suit brought to set aside the assignment. Whereas, in the pres- ent case, the question between the assignee in bankruptcy and the execution creditors relates, not to any specifie prop- erty, part of the assigned estate, or to any proceeds of it traced and identified as such, but his claim against them is merely for money damages. ����
