564 FEDERAL REPOHTEB. �charge to entitle him to it, the deficieney being, as before shown, $1,954.29. �A strong effort bas been made by certain creditors to pre- sent the discharge of the bankrupt. Elaborate specifications have been filed, each one of which bas been denied or answered, The grounds for opposing the discharge, without reciting in detail the specifications and answers, are substantially as fol- lows: �First. That the bankrupt has "wilfully swom falsely" in his affidavit annexed to his original petition and Schedule A thereto, in that he omitted to set forth certain debts of the Wilmiiigton EoUing Mill Company, amounting to $37,600, which he had assumed, and many other debts to the creditors unknown. �As to this specification the court takes leave to say that it considers there is no evidence whatever, in ail the transac- tions brought to its notice, of any wilf ul f aise swearing within the meaning of the provisions of the bankrupt act ; that the evidence conclusively shows that the indebtedness named in this specification was that of the Wilmington EoUing Mill Company, not that of the bankrupt ; as it was proven in the case, and not successfully refuted by the creditors, that the ultimate liability for the payment of this $37,500 depended on the suocessfui prosecution of the roUing mill business, which, for this consideration, had been transferred from the Company to the bankrupt. �The last clause of the first specification, in these words, viz., "and many other debts to the creditors unknown," is faulty by reason of its generality and want of precision. �Second. Specification charges wilful false swearing, in that he did not embody in his Schedule B ail his assets and property. On an examination of the evidence, this court thinks the bankrupt should have returned articles of prop- erty which he omitted, but under such circumstances as to negative any idea of wilful false swearing or fraud on the provisions of the bankrupt act. He should have returned his household goods, though it was very natural that a former exemption of the same property under execution by the sheriff, ����
