684 FUDERAÎt BBPOBTSB. �But why should the fact that Voetter bas been adjudged & bankrupt prejudice Brainard? Surely, if anything is authori- tatively settled, it is that an assignee in bankruptcy takes the bankrupt's estate subjeot to wbatever equities the bankrupt himself was liable to. �On the subject of set-offs the languape of the bankrupt law is as follows: "In ail cases of mutual debts or mutual credits between the parties the account between them shall be stated, and one debt set off against the other, and the bal- ance only shall be allowed or paid." Section 6073, U. S. Eev. St. �The term mutual credits imports something more than that of mutual dehts. Collyer on Part. § 1008. This bas been repeatedly held under the English bankrupt law, which on this subject is substantially the same as ours. �In the leading case of Bose v. Hart, 8 Taunt. 449, 3 Smith'a L. C. 293, it was held that the mutual credits within the meaning of the bankrupt law are credits which must, in their nature, terminate in debts ; and this means, net credita which must, ex necessitate rei, terminate in debts, but credits which have a natural tendenoy to terminate thus. Blumen- stiel's L. & P. in Bank. 285. �The case of French v. Fenn, 3 Doug. 257, in principle, is identical with the case in hand. There, Fenn and one Cox and another joined in an adventure to buy and sell pearls; and it was agreed that the money for the purchase should be advanced by Fenn, who was to receive interest from bis associates on bis advances made for them, and that the profit and loss should be equally divided between the three. Cox became bankrupt, and afterwards Fenn sold the pearls and received the money therefor. In an action by the assignees of Cox, to recover his share of the profits, it was held that Fenn was entitled to set oflf an independent debt due from Cox to himself. �1 find no case arising under our bankrupt law which de- cides the precise question now before me; but many cases have carried the doctrine of set-off arising from mutual cred- its as far as I am asked to do here. Thus, In re Doiv, 14 B. ����
