suit by an administrator against him as principal and his surety. (Jenks v. Opp, 12 N. B. R. 19.) A witness having purchased claims against a bankrupt's estate, being examined as to where he obtained the money paid therefor, and having answered that it did not come from the bankrupt, is bound, on pain of contempt, to state where he did obtain it. (In re Lathrop et al., 4 N. B. R., 93; Fed. Cas. 8106.) He must answer all proper questions relating to his trade and dealings with a bankrupt prior to commencement of proceedings; and if, to answer properly, fully and truthfully any such question it is necessary that the witness should produce a copy of any transaction of his with the bankrupt, such copy must be produced. (In re Earle, 3 N. B. R. 81; Fed. Cas. 4244.) He cannot refuse to testify before the register concerning his dealings with the bankrupt on the ground that his answers may furnish evidence against him in a civil action brought or to be brought on behalf of the assignee. (In re Fay, 3 N. B. R. 163; Fed. Cas. 4708.) It has been held that a witness may be compelled by the circuit court in another state to testify, or be punished for a refusal to testify, when a commission is issued by the bankrupt court and sent to such other state. (In re Johnston, 14 N. B. R. 569; Fed. Cas. 7423.) A witness is not compelled to answer, on cross-examination, a question which does not relate to any matter of fact in issue, or to any matter contained in his direct testimony, a truthful answer to which would tend to degrade him. (In re Lewis, 3 N. B R. 153; 4 Ben. 67; 39 How. Pr. 155; Fed. Cas. 8312.)

A witness regularly summoned, on application of the assignee, in bankruptcy proceedings, submitting himself to examination after making objections, waives his objections, and he cannot refuse to be examined on the ground that the bankrupt has not been examined, and that there was no question in controversy to be settled by testimony. (In re Fredenburg, 1 N. B. R. 34; 2 Ben. 133; Fed. Cas. 5075.) He is not rendered incompetent by reason of the fact that an assignee has filed a petition against him with others in the proceeding in relation to the property of the bankrupt, and an injunction awarded thereon. (In re Feinberg, 2 N. B. R. 137; 3 Ben. 162; Fed. Cas. 4716.) It has been held that a witness summoned before a register for examination is not entitled to appear by counsel (In re Comstock & Co., 13 N. B. R. 193; 3 Sawy. 517; 8 Chi. Leg. News, 82; Fed. Cas. 3080), unless he is made a party to a new collateral proceeding by being cited to answer for contempt. (In re Feinberg et al., 2 N. B. R. 137; 3 Ben. 162; Fed. Cas. 4716.)

Assignee as witness.— An assignee may be subpoenaed and required to testify in the same manner as any other witness, and the register has authority to make the requisite order; but he is not subject as of course to an examination by any creditor whenever the latter may desire it, but will be protected from unnecessary annoyance, by the refusal of an application for his examination, unless upon some issue regularly referred to the register. (In re Smith, 14 N. B. R. 432; Fed. Cas 12988.)

b. The right to take depositions in proceedings under this act shall be determined and enjoyed according to the United States laws now in force, or such as may be hereafter enacted relating to the taking of depositions, except as herein provided.

The law governing the taking of testimony is found in U. S. Rev. Stat., secs. 858-879, and the persons before whom the same may be taken are set forth in sec. 1778 and the act of August 15, 1876 (1 Supp. Rev. Stat. 123). The act of March 9, 1892 (2 Supp. Rev. Stat. 4), also authorizes the taking of depositions of witnesses in cases pending at law or in equity in the district or circuit courts of the United States, in the mode prescribed by the laws of the state in which the courts are held.

A deposition, taken by the defendant before a register having power to administer oaths, no objection being made, and the witness being examined and cross-examined, was properly taken (Lawrence, Ass., v. Graves, 5 N. B. R. 279; Fed. Cas. 8138); if taken after the filing of the petition, is valid, although proceedings may not be pending before him. (In re Deane, 2 N. B. R. 29; 15 Pittsb. Leg. J. 581, 583; Fed. Cas. 3700.) In a deposition in proof of debts, where a commissioner failed to sign the jurat, the omission may be supplied if he recollects the fact of the creditor signing and verifying in his presence, otherwise the party may be sworn and the deposition filed nunc pro tunc. (In re McKibben, 12 N. B. R. 97; Fed. Cas. 8859.)

When depositions are not taken ex parte or de bene esse under the act of 1789, or both parties appear and examine and cross-examine, the depositions being subsequently placed on file, the party at whose instance they were taken cannot object to their being read by the opposite party, on the ground of irregularity or informality. (Lawrence, Ass., v. Graves, 5 N. B. R. 279; Fed. Cas. 8138.) A deposition which has been altered to correct an error must be resworn to before it can be filed, and a deponent cannot confer upon another the power to alter a sworn paper. (In re Walther v. Walther, 14 N. B. R. 273; Fed. Cas. 17126.) The deposition of acts of bankruptcy must be such as constitutes legal testimony in order to authorize the making of an order to show cause (In re Rosenfields, 11 N. B. R. 86; 3 Amer. Law Rec. 724: 1 Cent. Law J. 553; Fed. Cas. 12031); if the depositions or affidavits to the petition as to indebtedness and acts of bankruptcy are not sunlcient, the court may allow supplemental affidavits or proofs to be file 1. (In re Hanibel et al., 15 N. B. R. 233; 9 Chi. Leg. News, 165; 15 Alb. Law J. 271: 24 Pittsb. Leg. J. 152; Ted. Cas. 6023.) A deposition to an act of bankruptcy consisting of a fraudulent conveyance must allege or show the fraudulent intent of the debtor in making the conveyance. (Cunningham v. Cady, 13 N. B. R. 525: 8 Chi. Leg. News, 165; 4 Amer. Law Rec. 510; Fed. Cas. 3480.) Original

papers which have been exhibited to the court and annexed to depositions, and become marked and referred to therein as exhibits, become a part of the depositions, and cannot be withdrawn and a copy substituted therefor, except upon the application of a party who can show a proper use therefor. (In re McNair, 2 N. B. R. 109; Fed. Cas. 8908.)

c. Notice of the taking of depositions shall be filed with the referee in every case. When depositions are to be taken in opposition to the allowance of a claim notice shall also be served upon the claimant, and when in opposition to a discharge notice shall also be served upon the bankrupt.

Section 58, c, requiring all notices to be given by the referee unless otherwise ordered by the judge, does not seem to comprehend notices for the taking of depositions, but such notices should be given by the attorney.

d. Certified copies of proceedings before a referee, or of papers, when issued by the clerk or referee, shall be admitted as evidence with like force and effect as certified copies of the records of district courts of the United States are now or may hereafter be admitted as evidence.

[Act of 1867. SEC. 14. and a copy, duly certified by the clerk of the court, under the seal thereof, of the assignment made by the judge or register, as the case may be, to him as assignee, shall be conclusive evidence of his title as such assignee to take, hold, sue for, and recover the property of the bankrupt, as herein before mentioned;

SEO. 38. Copies of such records, duly certified under the seal of the court, shall in all cases be prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.]

A record cannot be impeached without previous notice by proper form of pleading. (Sloan v. Lewis, 12 N. B. R. 173; 22 Wall. 150.) The register is an officer of the court and will take judicial notice of its judgments and decrees (In re Scott et al., 15 N. E. R. 73; 4 Cent. Law J. 29; Fed. Cas. 12519); and to prove what proceedings have taken place before him, the entries of a register may be used as evidence; but as to the number of days that a witness was in attendance before a register, the certificate of the clerk is prima facie evidence (In re Crane & Co., 15 N. B. R. 120; 1 Tex. Law J. 41; Fed. Cas. 3352); the certified copy of the examination of a debtor in another state comes within the statutory "judicial proceedings" (In re Rooney, 6 N. B. R. 163; Fed. Cas. 12032); a copy of the

record is admissible although it does not purport to be a copy of the entire record (Michener v. Payson, Ass., 13 N. B. R. 49; 1 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 272; 2 Wkly. Notes Cas. 339; 8 Chi. Leg. News, 17; 23 Pittsb. Leg. J. 38; Fed. Cas. 9524); and if certified by the clerk under the seal of the court is prima facie evidence of the facts therein contained, without the certificate of the judge that the attestation is in due form. (Turnbull v. Payson, Ass., 16 N. B. R. 440; 95 U. S. 418.)

e. A certified copy of the order approving the bond of a trustee shall constitute conclusive evidence of the vesting in him of the title to the property of the bankrupt, and if recorded shall impart the same notice that a deed from the bankrupt to the trustee if recorded would have imparted had not bankruptcy proceedings intervened.

An assignee's representative character need not be averred in the pleadings, and it is not necessary to prove all the steps in the proceedings if a duly certified copy of the assignment be put in evidence. (Dambmann v. White et al., 12 N. B. R. 438.) The court is bound to take judicial notice that all the bankrupt's property and effects were vested, by operation of law, in the assignee, after it is shown that the defendant has been declared a bankrupt. (Morris v. Davidson, 11 N. B. R. 454.) An assignment to assignee, no one opposing, must be recorded when presented (In re Neale, 3 N. B. R. 43; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 295; Fed. Cas. 10066); but a record of the assignment is not necessary to give force or validity to the transfer to the assignee (Davis v. Anderson, 6 N. B. R. 146; Fed. Cas. 3623); and under a general averment that the plaintiff was possessed as of his own property, proof may be given that he acquired the title by means of proceedings in bankruptcy. (Dambmann v. White et al, 12 N. B. R. 438.)

f. A certified copy of an order confirming or setting aside a composition, or granting or setting aside a discharge, not revoked, shall be evidence of the jurisdiction of the court, the regularity of the proceedings, and of the fact that the order was made.

[Act of 1867. SEC. 34.

may be pleaded

A discharge duly granted as a full and complete bar to all suits brought on any such debts, claims, liabilities or demands, and the certificate shall be conclusive evidence in favor of such bankrupt of the fact and [the] regularity of such discharge.]

If jurisdiction is shown by the record, an adjudication cannot be assailed in a collateral action (Sloan v. Lewis, 12 N. B. R. 173; 22 Wall. 150); but, no jurisdiction of the subject-matter or parties existing in the court which rendered judgment, it is null and void and may be impeached in collateral proceedings, and the record of the court showing such jurisdiction may be contradicted by parol evidence. (In re McKibben, 12 N. B. R. 97; Fed. Cas. 8859.)

A certificate of discharge in bankruptcy, signed by the judge, attested by the clerk under the seal of the court, is not only sufficiently authenticated, but it is precisely the means by which the bankrupt is to prove and have the benefit of his discharge. (Miller v. Chandler, 17 N. B. R. 251.) The discharge of the bankrupt is conclusive of the regularity of the proceedings, and can only be attacked in the court granting it, upon proper proceedings (In re Witkowski, 10 N. B. R. 209; Fed. Cas. 17920); and a certificate of discharge is conclusive evidence in favor of the bankrupt of the fact and regularity of the discharge, but it is not conclusive evidence in favor of other parties seeking to use it. (Dewey v. Moyer, 18 N. B. R. 114.)

g. A certified copy of an order confirming a composition shall constitute evidence of the revesting of the title of his property in the bankrupt, and if recorded shall impart the same notice that a deed from the trustee to the bankrupt if recorded would impart.

The trustee of the estate of a bankrupt, upon his appointment and qualification, is by operation of law vested with the title of the bankrupt as of the date he was adjudged a bankrupt, except in so far as it is to property which is exempt. (Sec. 70.)

Sec. 22. Reference of cases after adjudication.—a. After a person has been adjudged a bankrupt the judge may cause the trustee to proceed with the administration of the estate, or refer it (1) generally to the referee or specially with only limited authority to act in the premises or to consider and report upon specified issues; or (2) to any referee within the territorial jurisdiction of the court, if the convenience of parties in interest will be served thereby, or for cause, or if the bankrupt does not do business, reside, or have his domicile in the district

Under this section the trustee is required to proceed with the administration by collecting and reducing to money the property of the estate