2/8 HARVARD LAW REVIEW, against assignments based on the penal provisions of the insolvent Acts,^ the power there given to examine the debtor under oath, and the machinery to set aside conveyances in fraud of equitable dis- tribution. At the same time, the number of cases in which these provisions are needed is not large. In such cases a resort to pro- ceedings under the insolvent law, in the first instance, would be much more likely to happen than not, and a debtor of that kind would be apt to give his creditors plenty of chances to invoke its help. Our court, then, would have good reason, on Massachusetts au- thorities, in upholding voluntary assignments. Yet it is more than likely that they will follow the analogy of the bankruptcy Acts if the question ever comes before them.^ The best course would be not to overthrow a system as old as the Commonwealth by a single decision, — for no one would dare to assign if a single churlish cred- itor could upset the assignment, — but, if further protection is needed for creditors, to let the Legislature give it in a way to protect assignments already in progress, and at the same time to simplify and expedite the course of the insolvent law. Prescott F. Hall. 1 P. S. ch. 157, § 119. See Emmons, J., in Globe Ins. Co. v. Cleveland Ins. Co. 14 N. B. R., 311 at 325. 2 Since this article was written, some of the questions herein discussed have come before the court in the case of Steel Edge Stamping and Retinning Co. v. Manchester Savings Bank. The validity of a voluntary assignment was raised by a bill in equity to stay insolvency proceedings. The writer was unaware of the case until after this article was finished. The case was argued Dec. 5 and 6, 1894, but the decision has not yet been handed down.
