Nelms and M'Culloch, Assignees of Baker, a bankrupt, vs. Pugh, 1 Mur. 149

STONE —Judge the opinion of the Court. The question, whether the bankruptcy shall relate buck to the arrest so as to avoid all intermediate dispositions' of the bankrupt, effects between the time of the arrest and the completion of the term of imprisonment, considered by the law as amounting to

an act of bankruptcy, can only be settled by the statute itself. That declares, the arrest and imprisonment are both necessary to constitute the act of bankruptcy, and not that either independently of ih<* o-her shall be sufficient: and they do rxi both exis. un:i? the ferns of imprisonment limited for tkav purpose by (»e statute has expired, The authorities fioia the. Regis*': boohs introduced to shew that the bank^Mptcy is in EugL'tni -,<( de in relate back to *’ e arte::!, , n* aiisweml by the statutes of bankruptcy themselves. A statute subsequent to that of 5th Jac. Op. 15. vid. the statute of 2i. Jac. 1.

Rap. it). expressly declares that the bankruptcy shall relate back to the arrest. — The act of Congress contains no such provi» cion. The second point made, that a precedent act of hack, iuptcy existed, cannot differ the iníerente above ; because we have no authority for establishing any other act as

an act of bankruptcy, than the one- on which the commission issued. — >0 udgment tor the Defendant.