the assignees, or the title of the bankrupt thereto be impaired or affected by any of the provisions of this act; and the determination of the assignee in the matter shall, on exception taken, be subject to the final decision of the said court.]

The bankrupt should file in triplicate, with the schedule of his property, a claim for such exemptions as he may be entitled to, one copy to be for the clerk, one for the referee, and one for the trustee (sec. 7—8); and the trustee is required to set apart such exemptions and report the items and estimated value thereof to the court as soon as practicable after his appointment (sec. 47-11), which is authorized to determine all such claims. (Sec. 2-11.)

The trustee is, by operation of law, vested with the title of the bankrupt's property, as of the date of the adjudication, except as to such which is exempt (sec. 70a), all of which, however, must be appraised by three disinterested appraisers and report thereof made to the court. (Sec. 70b.)

As this act does not affect the allowance to bankrupts of the exemptions which are prescribed by the state laws, the exemption laws of all the states and territories are set forth at length under Title IV.

Constitutionality. The fact that the constitution intrusts the "subject" of bankruptcies to Congress carries with it the power of defining what, and how much, of a debtor's property shall be exempt from the claims of his creditors. (In re Reiman et al., 13 N. B. R. 128; 12 Blatchf. 562; Fed. Cas. 11675.) And it may pass exemption laws which impair the obligation of contracts. (In re Owens, 12 N. B. R. 518; 6 Biss. 432; 7 Chi. Leg. News, 371; 1 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 175.) A provision in a bankrupt act which allows the exemptions given by the state laws (whether they are valid or not) is constitutional. (In re Smith, 14 N. B. R. 295; 2 Woods, 458; 2 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 532; 8 Chi. Leg. News, 315; 3 Cent. Law J. 386; 3 Amer. Law T. Rep. (N. S.) 335; Fed. Cas. 12996; In re Smith, 8 N. B. R. 401; 6 Chi. Leg. News, 33; Fed. Cas. 12986; In re Kean et al., 8 N. B. R. 367; 2 Amer. Law Rec. 230; Fed. Cas. 7630.) But it does not make valid a state exemption law held unconstitutional by the supreme court of such state. (Bush v. Lester et al., 15 N. B. R. 36.) The word "uniform" in the constitution refers only to uniformity in administration. (In re Jordan, 8 N. B. R. 180; 5 Leg. Op. 169; 30 Leg. Int. 296; Fed. Cas. 7514) Laws exempting reasonable portions of the debtor's property from execution and sale properly relate to the remedy, and are therefore not liable to a constitutional objection. (In re Owens, 12 N. B. R. 518; 6 Biss. 432; 7 Chi. Leg. News, 371; 1 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 175; Fed. Cas. 10632.) Title. The question of title is chiefly important as determining in what tribunal a bankrupt or a trustee may sue or be sued. Where a promissory note was assigned to a bankrupt as part of his exemption, it was held that, the title to said note being in him, he could bring suit

upon it. (Henry v. Lanier, 15 N. B. R. 280.) In like manner it has been held that a bankrupt law does not directly or indirectly transfer any part of a bankrupt's exempt property to his family, but leaves him full control over it. (Farmer v. Taylor et al., 15 N. B. R. 515.) Where a homestead, which was the only property the bankrupt had, was set apart to him as exempt, the court held that the title did not pass to the assignee in bankruptcy, and the creditor must pursue his remedy in the state courts. (In re Bass, 15 N. B. R. 453; 3 Woods, 382; 9 Chi. Leg. News, 303; Fed. Cas. 1091.) While the Bankrupt Act adopts the local exemption laws as to amount, it does not recognize restrictions upon the debtor in his power to convey the exempt property. Thus, a conveyance of such exempt property would be upheld, notwithstanding the local exemption law restricted such after-conveyance. (Farmer v. Taylor et al., 15 N. B. R. 515.) Where a bankrupt sought to compel the assignee to set apart real estate as a homestead, and also for an injunc tion to restrain a creditor from having said property sold under an execution on judgment, the relief was refused, on the ground that, if the property was a homestead, the title was unaffected by the Bankrupt Act, and if wrongfully seized in execution, it should be defended before the state court. (In re Hunt, 5 N. B. R. 493; 4 Chi. Leg. News, 5; 2 Pac. Law Rep. 146; Fed. Cas. 6883.) Where a member of a bankrupt firm owned a lot of ground upon which a house was built with the firm's funds, which were charged to the house, the firm then being indebted to said member in an amount in excess of cost of house, the court held that the house was part of the realty and therefore said member's separate property; that the firm had no ownership therein, and by reason of its debt no claim for reimbursement; and that only the excess over the amount allowed by exemption passed to the assignee. (In re Parks et al., 9 N. B. R. 270; Fed. Cas. 10765.) Where funds are deposited in trust, the income to be applied to the support of a bankrupt and his wife, and for the maintenance and education of their children, said income and principle being inalienable by the grantees under the terms of the grant, and not subject to their debts or control, such income will not pass to an assignee, nor will the court decree an aliquot part thereof to said assignee. (Durant, Ass., v. Insurance Co., 16 N. B. R. 324; Fed. Cas. 4183)

Exemptions in general.— It is the duty of the court to see that the bankrupt's exempt property is secured to him. (In re Stevens. 5 N. B. R. 298; 2 Biss. 373; 10 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.)523; Fed. Cas. 13392.) The right of exemption, if it exists at all, must exist at the date of the institution of bankruptcy proceedings. (In re Duerson, 13 N. B. R. 1983; FeL Cas. 4117.) While adopting the exemption laws of a state as part of the Bankrupt Law, Congress cannot dispense with any of the limitations which that law imposes. (Id.) And to be entitled to its benefits a bankrupt must comply with its requirements. (In re Jackson et al., 2 N. B.

R. 158; Fed. Cas. 7127.) If a bankrupt fails to select exemptions before his estate is sold, he thereby loses his rights thereto. (In re Solomon, 10 N. B. R. 9; 3 Amer. Law Rec. 226; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. (N. S.) 351; Fed. Cas. 13166.) Application for exemption can only be made before the bankrupt's discharge; and a discharged bankrupt cannot be re-admitted to petition for an additional exemption granted after his discharge. (In re Kean et al., 8 N. B. R. 367; 2 Amer. Law Rec. 230; Fed. Cas. 7630.) A bankrupt may select such property as he desires to have exempted, and, unless for cause, it will be set apart accordingly. (In re Solomon, 10 N. B. R. 9; 3 Amer. Law Rec. 226; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. (N. S.) 351; Fed. Cas. 13166.) He is entitled to the exemptions allowed by the law of his domicile, even if such exemptions have been increased subsequently to the recovery of judgments against him. (In re Smith, 8 N. B. R. 401; 6 Chi. Leg. News, 23; Fed. Cas. 12986.)

An assignee bears no relation to a bankrupt, except to set apart his exemptions; otherwise he is the agent of the law for the benefit of creditors. (Aiken v. Edrington, Sr., et al., 15 N. B. R. 271; Fed. Cas. 111.)

Homestead - General.- Real estate will only be set apart as exempt where the sale of other real estate will not be injuriously affected or the interests of creditors adversely affected thereby. (In re Edwards, 2 N. B. R. 109; Fed. Cas. 4293.) The right to a homestead exemption is not given by the Bankrupt Act, unless such right exists under state law (In re Kerr & Roach, 9 N. B. R. 566; Fed. Cas. 7729); but when allotted under such a law, and there is no fraud or other irregularity, a re-assessment will not be ordered for mere excess of value. (In re Hall, 9 N. B. R. 366; 2 Hughes, 411; Fed. Cas. 5921.) Where a state court sets apart a homestead, from which judgment an appeal is pending, the local statute providing that such appeals suspend but do not vacate such judgments, courts of bankruptcy will respect such homestead right though suspended, and will direct assignee to make himself party to such suit, and there determine the right to possession. (In re Mosely, Wells & Co., 8 N. B. R. 208; Fed. Cas. 9868.) A bankrupt cannot claim a homestead exemption in bankruptcy proceedings, under provisions of a state law, without complying with the provisions of such law. (In re Farish, 2 N. B. R. 62; Fed. Cas. 4647.) A bankrupt is entitled to homestead exemp tion, even where his wife owns a separate estate, provided her property is not occupied as a homestead by the family. (In re Tonne, 13 N. B. R. 170; 1 N. Y. Wkly. Dig. 170; Fed. Cas. 14095.)

Where an illiterate bankrupt misdescribed the land which he claimed as a homestead in his schedule, and the property was sold by the assignee, and an action of ejectment was brought by the purchaser, the court held that the application to have the error corrected should have been made to the bankrupt court. (Steele v. Moody, 16 N. B. R. 558.) Where the debtor, prior to bankruptcy, disposed of a homestead exempt under state laws, and which would be protected by the law if in his pos

session, it was held that he could not invoke the protection of the Bankrupt Act in favor of his vendee. (In re Everitt, 9 N. B. R. 90; Fed. Cas. 4579.) If an execution has been wrongfully issued against the exempted property of a bankrupt he has the same rights before the state courts as any other person whom it is sought to deprive of a homestead. (In re Everitt, 9 N. B. R. 90; Fed. Cas. 4579.) The right of a wife and children to a homestead provision out of the property of a bankrupt is not such a lien as follows it into the hands of a third person acquiring title before any application is made to the state court to set the same apart, and if the bankruptcy occurs before homestead is set apart, the right of the wife is a matter for the adjudication of the bankrupt court. (Lumpkin et al. v. Eason, 10 N. B. R. 519.) Under state law (Missouri), an estate for years is a proper subject of exemption, and when sold by the assignee he will be required to pay over the amount of the exemption to the bankrupt if it sells for more than that amount. (In re Beckerford, 4 N. B. R. 59; 10 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 57; 4 Amer. Law T. 14; 1 Amer. Law T. Rep. Bankr. 241; Fed. Cas. 1209.) Where an action is brought for the purchase price of land as a homestead, a discharge in bankruptcy may be pleaded in bar. (Hoskins v. Wall, 17 N. B. R. 314.) Under state law (Illinois), a judgment is a lien on the excess in value beyond the sum fixed as an exemption. (Haworth v. Travis et al., 13 N. B. R. 145.) The fact that land has been set apart in a bankruptcy proceeding as an exemption is not sufficient to enable the debtor to claim the exemption under state homestead laws. (Darsey v. Mumpford, 17 N. B. R. 181.)

The right to a homestead exemption is not lost by delaying to assert the same until assignee has made application for order to sell. (Bartholomew, Ass., v. West et al., 8 N. B. R. 12; 7 West. Jur. 441; Fed. Cas. 1071.) But where a bankrupt neglects to claim a homestead exemption in his schedule, he is deemed to have waived it. (Steele v. Moody, 16 N. B. R. 558.) A householder entitled to a homestead exemption does not forfeit his right thereto by absence from home on account of ill-health. (Bailey, Ass., v. Comings, 16 N. B. R. 382; 4 Law & Eq. 684; 10 Chi. Leg. News, 49; 25 Pittsb. Leg. J. 51; Fed. Cas. 733.)

Head of family.- An unmarried bankrupt, whose domestic affairs were in charge of a sister, who receives no pay for her services and pays no board, but considers her brother's home her home, is the head of a family, and entitled as such to a homestead exemption. (Id.) An unmarried man is not the head of a family, within the meaning of homestead laws, who has a household under his supervision, with minor children, awarded him as apprentices by orphans' court. (In re Summers, 3 N. B. R. 21; Fed. Cas. 13604.) But such a man residing in a house of which he is proprietor, and which has no other inmates than hired servants or persons living on his bounty, is the head of a family, and as such entitled to a homestead exemption; but he is not entitled to additional allowance for inmates for whose maintenance he is legally bound. (In re Taylor, 3 N. B. R. 38; Fed. Cas. 13775.)

Exemptions allowed.- Where one purchased a tract of land a short distance from a town and occupied it as his homestead, and the town was afterwards extended so as to include his property, which was divided by streets and alleys, the court decided that he was entitled to a rural homestead and the extension of the city did not affect it. (In re Young, 15 N. B. R. 205; 1 Tex. Law J. 7; Fed. Cas. 18149.) A bankrupt who has mortgaged the only real estate he owns may claim a homestead exemption out of land so mortgaged. (In re Brown, 3 N. B. R. 60; 2 Amer. Law T. 122; 1 Chi. Leg. News, 409; Fed. Cas. 1980.) Under state law (Kentucky), a bankrupt is not entitled to an exemption of an undivided interest in land on which there are no improvements, although he has expressed an intention to make it a homestead. (In re Duerson, 13 N. B. R. 183; Fed. Cas. 4117.) Where a farm, subject to a mortgage, was sold free of homestead rights with consent of bankrupt, the court held that he was entitled to homestead of full value in the equity of redemption, and was paid out of the avails of the sale. (In re Beede, 19 N. B. R. 68; 26 Pittsb. Leg. J. 172; Fed. Cas. 1226.) A husband has the right to invest value of a homestead in premises to which others hold the legal title, or into an undivided part interest in land; but where a bankrupt and his wife built a house on land bargained for by her and paid for in part from her separate means, and for which she afterwards paid the balance and took a deed, the assignee was held to be entitled to a conveyance of the husband's interest, less the amount he was authorized by law to invest in a homestead. (Johnson, Ass., v. May et al., 16 N. B. R. 425; Fed. Cas. 7397.) Where a conveyance, fraudulent as to creditors, is set aside by a bankrupt court, at the instance of the assignee, the parties are restored to the state they occupied prior to such conveyance, and a bankrupt is entitled to his homestead exemption, and is not estopped by said fraudulent conveyance. (In re Detert, 11 N. B. R. 293; 7 Chi. Leg. News, 130; 14 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 166; Fed. Cas. 3829; Cox v. Wilder et al., 7 N. B. R. 241; 2 Dill. 45; 5 Amer. Law J. Rep. (U. S. Cts.) 500; Fed. Cas. 3308; Penny v. Taylor, 10 N. B. R. 200; Fed. Cas. 10957; McFarland v. Goodman et al., 11 N. B. R. 134; 6 Biss. 111; 13 Amer. Law Reg. (N. S.) 697; Fed. Cas. 8789; Bartholomew, Ass., v. West et al., 8 N. B. R. 12; 7 West. Jur. 441; Fed. Cas. 1071; Smith v. Kehr, 7 N. B. R. 97; 2 Dill. 50; 6 West. Jur. 451; Fed. Cas. 13071.)

Exemptions disallowed.— A member of a firm of debtors appropriated money of the firm for the purchase of a homestead and claimed it as exempt; the claim was disallowed; he then mortgaged the premises, his wife joining; the assignee demanded the surrender of the land and release of the mortgage; the bankrupt alleged his wife's refusal to give up the property; the court held that the wife acquired no interest in the property, it having been purchased in fraud of creditors. (In re Boothroyd, 15 N. B. R. 368; 2 Cent. Law Bul. 139; Fed. Cas. 1653.) A merchant who, two weeks before his bankruptcy, sells his home for cash,