IN BB WAGGCHBR. 915 �The bantrupt iïlsists that in estimating the amount or value of his estate he is entitled to the beneat of the $90 deposit. It is not necessary for me to pass on this question, for the rea- son that, even if conceded, it is still short of the amount neces- sary to pay 30 per cent, on the $668 of indebtedness, which requires $200.40, while he has only $184.45. But the bank rupt further insists that his personal property sold by thfe assignee should have sold for at least $250, and submits depositions to thàt effect, which are herewith filed. . The register is clearly of the opinion that the proof establishes a value in excess of the assignee's report of about $150, or au aggregate of from $225 to $250. Is this proof admissible, and is the bankrupt entitled to the benefit thereof as claimed ? This question first arose in this district In re Toof, Phillips a: Co. The register reported adversely, and waa reversed by his honor, Judge Trigg, since which that has been the prac- tice in this district, and I rôapectfuUy recommendihat it be adopted in the present case. �"There are no further assets on hand, as shown by the assignee's report. �"The bankrupt has passed his final examination, and fuUy conformed td ail the ordersof the court, and appears to b© entitled to bis discharge. �"Eespectfully Bubmitted, �"T. J. Latham, "Eegister in Bankruptcy." �The assignee's report of the sale mentioned the property sold as one jack, one 27-year-old mule, one one-year-old mule, one mare, and sundry debts due the bankrupt; ail sold for $94.45. I find in the files two depositions taken in the pres- ence of the assignee, the bankrupt and his attorney, and one of the creditors, the witnesses being cross-examined by the assignee. These depositions were taken by the bankrupt to prove that his assets were worth largely more than they were sold for at' the sale. One of these witnesses gives it as his opinion that the jack was worth $100;, the older mule, $45 to $50; the younger one, $25 to.$30; and the mare, $60. And he giveS' it as his opinion that Jopling, whose debt iii a ����
