"The general assignment, made by Abraham to Davidson, did not constitute Davidson an assignee for value, but simply made him an agent of Abraham for the distribution of the proceeds of the property among Abraham's creditors."

—act of 1898 (30 Stat. at L. 544, chap. 541, US Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3418) the receiver in the original case would have had the right, acting under authority of the court to take possession in a summary proceeding of the bankrupts' property, found as was this, in possession of those admittedly holding it for the bankrupts, and to hold the property until the qualification of the …

The Supreme Court has long held that simple participation by a creditor in the claims resolution process constitutes consent to the entry of a final order as to that claim.

Abraham, nine days before the filing of a petition in bankruptcy against him, made a general assignment to Davidson of all of his property for the benefit of his creditors.

—and may take property from the possession of the purchaser from the assignee of the bankrupt under a general assignment

In considering these questions, strict regard must be had to the provisions of that act, which, as this court has already had occasion to observe, differ in important respects from those of the earlier bankrupt acts.

No proof of insolvency is required with respect to the first part of the fifth act, a general assignment

Such is the rule with respect to assignees for the benefit of creditors within four months of filing of the petition.

In this case before adjudication the bankruptcy court saw fit to appoint a receiver and demand the assets under authority of section 2, clause 3, of the Bankruptcy Act