774 FEDERAL REPORTER. �ment, acquired only an inchoate title, that was void as against an attaching crediter of the assigner. The court say tiie Bchedule required by the act to be made by the debtor within 20 days from the date of assignment is a necessary part of a valid assignment, and a prerequisite to vesting the title to the property in the assignee; and that the execution by the assignee of the bond required by the act is also a pre- requisite to the acquisition of an absolute title by the assignee, and that until the inventory is filed and bond executed the property may lawfuUy be seized on attachment at the suit of the debtor's creditera. And the court say further that "as- signors must see, in selecting assignees, that they will not only accept, but that they can and -will give the bond re- quired, and assignors must take care to complete the assign- ment by giving the necessary schedule." Juliand y. Rath- bone, 39 N. Y. 369. And see Hadman v. Bowen, Id. 196; Britton v. Lorenz, 45 N. Y. 51. �Confessedly, until the inventory is filed and bond given, the assignee is not entitled to the possession of the property, but the possession remains -with the debtor. Now, if the deed of -assignment, 'without more, passes the title and bars creditors from proceeding at law to subject the property to the pay- ment of their debts, the property is placed in a novel predic- ament : the assignee cannot dispose of it in execution of the trust, nor can it be reached by proceedings against him, be- cause neither the possessioi^ nor rights of possession, nor dis- position is in him ; and creditors cannot reach it in the hands of the debtor, for though in hia possession, the title is in his assignee, and he only holds it as a kind of bailee or trustee, until it shall please his assignee to file an inventory and give the required bond. This, in effect, is making the debtor his own trustee. Is this state of things to continue at the pleas- ure of the debtor and his assignee? If' not, when and how is it to be terminated ? �It is said creditors may resert to equity to enforce the trust. Without inquiring whether a bill would lie for that purpose, espeoially at the suit of a crediter excluded from ail benefits under the assignment, it certainly is not their only ��� �
