1796-] _ 
from hence that the whole property of the 
bankrupt muft be under their controul, 
without regard to the locality of that pro- 
perty, except in c:ees which direétly mili- 
tated againft the particular laws. of the 
- country in which it happened to be fitu- 
ated. No creditor, whofe debt was con- 
tracted within the fphere of operation of 
thofe laws, and ‘who had notice of the 
infolvency of the debtor, could recover 
any part of the common fund for his own 
particular advantage; after an afflignment 
had taken place, his intereft was tranf- 
ferred to the aflionees, and if he did re- 
cover, he muft account to the other cre- 
aitors for the fum received. If the bank- 
rupt laws were circumfcribed by the local 
fituation of the property, a door would be 
opened to all the partiality and undue pre- 
ference which they were framed to pre- 
vent; property might be fent abroad with 
that unjuft view, immediately previous to 
an act of bankruptcy, and in contempla- 
tion of it. If the perfonal property of 
merchants employed in the courfe of their 
dealings in foreign countries, were to be 
taken by an individual creditor going from 
hence for that purpofe, and not to be 
diftributable among the creditors at large, 
fuch merchants would be materially af- 
fected in their credit at home. The laws 
ef the country, indeed, where the pro- 
perty was fituated, had the immediate 
controul over it, in refpeét to its locality, 
and the immediate proteétion afforded it; 
yet the country where the proprietor re- 
fided, in refpeét to another {pecies of pro- 
tection afforded to him and his property, 
had a right to regulate his condué& relat- 
ing to that property. This proteétion af- 
forded to the property of a refident fub- 
jeét, which was fituated in a foreign coun- 
. try, was not imaginary, but real. The 
property which this country protected, it 
had a right to regulate; and, in faét, our 
bankrupt laws had made fuch regulations. 
The ft. 13 El. c. 7, enabled the com- 
miffioners to take the bankrupt’s money, 
goods, &c. and debts, «wherefoever they 
may be found or known. This~expreffion 
feemed to extend beyond the debts and 
effects of a trader locally confined within 
this kingdom. In a country, a great 
part of whofe commercial capital was em- 
ployed abroad, it was peculiarly proper 
that fuch capital over which the trader 
had a difpofing power, though fituated 
out of the kingdom, fhould be confidered 
as referable to the place of refidence of the 
pwmere bho ft. a [0 0, exch. f) 13), 
which enables the commilflioners to afhgn 
New Decifions in Law. 
ent on it. 
235 
debts due to the bankrupts, direéted that 
the fame fhould not be attached as toe debr 
of the bankrupt, according to the cuftom of 
the city of London, or otherwifé. The 
affiznment being made by the authority 
of parliament, every fubjeét of the king- 
dom was a party to it, inafmuch -as he 
was a party and confenting to an ati of 
parliament; and having joined in the affign- 
ment, he could not be permitted to con- 
trovert it, by attaching the debt in the 
hands of the debtor; and if by means of 
an attachment he received the money, it 
was received to the ufe of the affignecs. 
The words of the ftatute extended to all 
foreign attachments, both at home and 
abroad, in countries whether fubje€& to 
the crowh of Great Britain, or independ- 
As debts due to the bankrupts 
from the fubjeéts of foreign countries 
paffed under the aflignment, the attach- 
ments muft be confidered as coextenfive 
with the debts mentioned in the ftatute. 
It had been objeéted, that the judgment 
in Pennfylvania was final and conclufive, 
and beund the property. That it muft 
be fo underftood between the debtor, of 
whom the debt was recovered by the at- 
tachment, and the original creditor, that 
is, the bankrupt and his affignees, was not 
to be difpyted. But as the recovery of 
the plaintiffs in error, otherwife than for 
the ufe of the defendants, the ailignees, 
would be in violation of an aét of parlia- 
ment, fuch recovery muft be taken to be 
for the ufe of the latter. In the prefent 
action, indeed, the judgment of the court 
in Pennfylvania was affirmed; and another 
objeftion had been made, that the refi- 
dence of Crammond in America enabled 
him to recover his debt, without account- 
ing for it to the affignees. ‘To this the 
anfwer was, that zo refidence in foreign 
parts could exempt a Britifh fubjeét from 
the operation of an aét of parliament, 
much lefs an occafional refidence. It was 
alfo obje€ted to the affignees, that they 
did not ftate their claim in the foreign 
court, which they ought to have done, in- 
ftead of bringing their aétion here. It 
was not, however, ftated in the verdict 
that they had notice of the proceedings 
there. No Englith fubjeét could be affect- 
ed by the proceedings ia a foreign court, 
without clear and direét notice; for how- 
ever, from a prefumption of notice, they 
were bound by the proceedings in our owz 
courts, no fuch prefumption could be 
raifed with refpeét to foreign courts. To 
the obje@ion, that in many inftances the 
bankrupt laws of this country did not 
rit 2 operate 
