SHAINWALD V. LEWIS. 767 �be declared upon liis laijd; had sold valuable real estate, and threatens, intends, and is about to leaye and depart the United States, and take and carry .mth him ail bis mo.ney and otber property, with the intent, object, purpose, and design of pre- venting the same from being levied upon or applied in satis- faction of said decree, and with intent to hinder, delay, and defraud this complainant of the moneys and property to which he is entitled under said decree. That since the enr(^^ ing of said decree the respoudent has secretly transferred a, large part of his property. to divers persons, and bas secreted the remainder of bis property with the intent and design aforesaid, and to prevent said property from being seized on execution, or secured or applied to satisfy said decree. That the respondent bas stated and declared to divers persons that he had so fixed his property that it could not be seized to satisfy said decree. That the respondent has property, debts, and other equitable interests to the value of $90,000, exclu- sive of ail just prior clakns thereto, wbich the colnplainant has been unable to reach by execution. That the action is. not commenced by collusion with respondent, or with any other person, for the purpose of protecting the property or effects of the respondent against the claims of otber creditors. The bill contains the usual prayer for an injunction, for a receiver, and for other relief. Upon this bill an injunction was issued and a receiver appointed, and the respondent waa ordered to show and make an assignment of ail his property and eflfects. This he at first refused to do, and was committed for contempt. At a subsequent day he executed the assign- ment, wbich, by order of the court, remained in the custody of the clerk until the hearing and decision of the present motion to vacate the order appointing a receiver and for the execution of the assignment. That motion has accordingly been made and argued. It is based ou the grounds — (1) That the bill of complaint herein does not disclose any equitable ground for the appoiutment eitber of a receiver or referee ; (2) that, upon the facts disclosed in the aflfidavits and papers fil'ed herein, the appointment of a receiver or referee is unnec- essary. The notice of motion states "that it is based upon ��� �
