SEALE V. VAIDEK. 831 �cause the. employment of a stenographer was not directed by the court, and there was no consent to the insertion of any part of the stenographer' s charges in the bill of costs. �The item of interest on the judgment from the day of the rendition of the verdict to the day of entry of the judgment, amounting to some $500, may be allowed. The delay was caused by a stay of proceedings during the pending of a motion for a new trial. ihis delay should not be at the plaintiff's expense, The payment of interest meanwhile might properly be deemed a condition attachedto the stay; or, if not, an entry of the judgment as of the date of entering the motion for new trial might, if necessary to avoid damages to the plaintifi, be per- mitted ; but I consider the item of interest on a verdict within the equity of the statute, (section 996, Eev. St.,) and for that reason tax- able. Nat. Bank v. Mechanics' Nat. Bank, 94 U. S. 439. See, also, Dowell V. Giiswold, 5 Sawy. 24. �The clerk will, therefore, allow the item of one dollar paid for serv- ing the summons, will reject the item of cash paid stenographer, and wUl allow interest on the amount of the verdict from the date of its rendition to the date of entering up the judgment. �Ths sum paid for the copy of the record of the coroner's inquest may also be allowed. ���Sbale, Assignee, etc., v. Vaiden, Hawkins & Eoberts and others. {District Court, N. B. Mismsippi. December Term, 1881.) �1. ASSIGNMENT FOE BeNEFIT OP CrEDITOHS— UNI.AWFU1, PREFERENCE. �Where, in a deed of trust, the trustee is directed, firsUy, to pay all the costs and expanses incidental to its execution ; secondly, a note exccuted by the grant- ors to their attorneys ; thirdly, to pay all the creditors who might apply -within 30 days, 33J^ per cent, on their debts, provided they would release the balance of their demands ; /oMrtWy, to pay all other creditors, who should apply within 60 days after said assignment was made, the amount due' them in f ull, if there should be money sufflcieut for that purpose, and if not then a pro rata share to each, provided they should release the remainder of their debts, if any ; fiftUly, to all other creditors the amount due them, ont of any surplus whichmay remain after the before-mentioned payments, — is fraudulent and void as against non-assent- ing creditors. �2. SAME — RiGHTS OP KON-ASSKKTINa CeEDITOI!S. �When an assignment is made in whioh a participation in the asseta is depend- ent upon entering a release of the remainder of the debt due, and there is no provision made for a distribution of the surplus among non-assenting creditors, Buch assignment is per ae fraudulent and void. ��� �
