7S4 FEDBBAL .BEPOBTBB. �the firm of Woolfolk, Walker & Go,, composed of James H. Woolfolk and two other partners, was adjudicated bank- rupt; and the estate of James H. Woolfolk was managed by a oommittee of creditors and a trustee under section 43 of the bankrupt aot. I. 0. Plant & Son foreclosed their mort- gage and levied the mortgage execution upon the mortgaged promises. Pending the levy, it was agreed between Plant & Son and the trustee in bankruptcy that the property should be sold under the mortgage execution and the proceeds held for distribution in the bankrupt court. The property was sold for $5,834. �The only claim in the bankrupt court which disputed the right of Plant & Son to said proceeds was the judgment of D. P. Gunn against said James H. Woolfolk and others, which had been proved as such in the bankrupt court. This judgment, if valid, was the oldest lien, on all the property, real and Per- sonal, of James H. Woolfolk. To determine the question of priority between said judgment and mortgage, (and also for the purpose of obtaining an injunction, which is not now a material part of the case,) I, C. Plant & Son filed their bill in the circuit court, alleging the priority of their mortgage lien, because neither the verdict nor judgment of said Daniel P. Guim had ever been entered on the minutes of the court in which it was rendered. The bill also alleged that James H. Woolfolk was the reputed owner of a large tract of land in Jones county, consisting of 2,100 acres, and which was worth largely more than the entire amount du0 on the judgment in favor of Gunn, both, principal and interest, and which was subject to the lien of said judgment equally with the land on which Plant & Son held a mortgage, and that Gunn should be compelled in equity to enforce his judgment against the land on which Plapt & Son had no lien. �The answer of the defendants set up the priority of the judgment in favor of Gunn ; and also set up that the land in Jones county, consisting of 2,100 acres, had been conveyed by James H. Woolfolk to his brother Lowell C. Woolfolk, who claimed the title and possession of the same, and that it could ohly be made subject to the jucigraent after a litiga- ��� �
