BROWN V. THE JBPFEKSON COUNTY NAT. BAltK. 26T �fused to give Mr. Brown any information whatever, and did not give Mr. Grouse any more than he could help ; that his said attor- neys had told him that the least he answered the better it would be for him; and that he did not tell Mr. Grouse or Mr. Brown that the bank had sued them. He says, "I kept that to myself." �Mr. Brown testifLes that he and Mr. Grouse, both of whom resided at Dtica, went from there to Watertown on the thirtieth of March for the purpose of getting information to put the debtors in bankruptcy; that while at Watertown at that time they got such information; and that they proceeded to put them into bankruptcy. �The petition in bankruptcy is brought by seven copartnership firms, composing a firm of which Mr. Grouse was a member, and a firm of which Mr. Brown was a member. The debt to Mr. Grouse' s firm is set forth as one note maturing March 30th, and Ofle maturing April 29th. The debt to Mr. Brown's firm is set forth as one note matur- ing March 18tli, one April llth, one April 15th, and one May 7th, and an open account for goods sold. The acts of bankruptcy alleged in the petition are the preferential payment by the debtors, on the twenty-seoond of March, to one Normander, of about $600, he being liable as indoirser on a note of theiro, and the fraudulent stoppage of payment by the debtors on the twenty-second of March. �It is alleged in the petition that the debtors "decline to give your petitioners any statement of their afifairs, or how they stand, or what they can pay, but refer your petitioners to their lawyers, Messrs. McCartin & Williams, who also decline to give your petitioners any statement of said alleged bankrupts' affairs ; " and that the debtors "are trying in some way to make away with their property, either to secure their confidential debts, or in some other manner to defraud their creditors." The petition was verified by Mr. Grouse and Mr. Brown, and two other creditors, on the fourth of April, and by a fifth crediter on the fifth of April. No defence appears to have been made to the petition, as the adjudication wae made on the return-day of the order to show cause. �These facts make out a case of the procuring, by the debtors, of the taking of the property on execution. The creditors obtained, on the thirtieth of March, the necessary information to put the debt- ors into bankruptcy. They inquired of H. V. Cadwell about a pay- ment by the debtors of a note of theirs for $600, and were met by his refusai to answer; such refusai being distinctly advised by McCartin and Williams. Presumably this was with a view to a peti- tion in bankruptcy, as such a payment of $600 is alleged as an act ��� �
