This historic book may have numerous typos or missing text. Not indexed. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1906. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... answer, and the case was referred to a special master, who heard the testimony and reported his conclusions, sustaining the allegations of the bill. Objections to the report were overruled by the District Court, and a motion on behalf of the appellant, supported by an affidavit of the witness Anderson, for further hearing to enable such opposing witness to correct an alleged material error in his testimony, was denied. Thereupon this decree was entered. The question for review upon the merits is the sufficiency of the testimony to establish a voidable preference, under section 60b of the bankruptcy act. Act July 1, 1898, c. 511, 30 Stat. 562 U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3445. The appellant (residing at Peoria) was a creditor of the bankrupt firm (located at Farmington) and was instrumental, through his representatives, in procuring a purchaser to take the stock and business of the bankrupt firm, within four months before the commencement of proceedings in bankruptcy. In the transaction the purchaser assumed the indebtedness of the retiring firm to the appellant (of which only a portion was due), as a part of the purchase price, and his note for the amount ($964.52) was.given and accepted in satisfaction of such agreement. The bona fides of the bargain on the part of the purchaser is undisputed, but the appellant's participation and benefit, by way of securing his account, plainly involves a preference to that extent, within the meaning of section 60b, provided the appellant or his agents "had reasonable cause to believe that it was intended thereby to give a preference" to him; the fact of the bankrupt's insolvency at such date appearing from the evidence. The report of the master refers to an interview between the bankrupt and one Thompson, credit man for the...