FEiZER V. COLOKADO DBBSSING & BMELTINO 00. 163 �The hearing of the application is postponed until the return-day, and leave given to the defendant to apply to compel the increase of the amount of the plaintiffs' bond, if the Bum of $50,0010 is insuffioient. ���Fbazbb & Chalmbes V. CoiiOBADO Dressino & Smeltino C3o. �and others. �(Circuit Court, D. Colorado. Decembcr, 1880.) �1. JuKisDiCTioN — Çreditors' Bill. — A federal court may entertain ju- �risdiction of a credltors' bill, although the parties to the suit may bo compelled to testify under an act of congresa. �2. Samb — Same.— Such court may entertain jurisdiction of such bill, al» �though the Code of the state give» special proceedings, having in view the same purpose, to reach any property of the judgment debtor, and subject it to execution under the judgment. — [Ed. �In Equity. Demarrer. �M. B. Carpenter, for plaintiff. �L. G. Rockwell, for defendant. �Hallbtt, D. J. This is a creditor's bill, and a demurrer waa put in upon the ground that there was no jurisdiction in equity in such matters, because the parties may now be com- pelled to testify under the act of eongress ; and also upon the ground that the Code of the state gives special proceedings, having in view the same purpose, to reach any property of the judgment debtor, and subject it to execution under the judgment. �As to the first ground, it is enough to say that this is not a bill for discovery only. It may be true as to bills for dis- covery, and especially where the discovery is sought in aid of an action at law, that there is no reason for entertaining them, since the statute allows parties to be examined, and ail persons to be examined as witneBses in the cause. But this is not a bill of that eharacter. It is tnte it seeks to dis- cover what property and eflfects the oompany may have which may be subject to execution; but it also seeks to ����
