. IN BE IOUNG. 14I �Dexjmmond, C. J. The bankrupt in this case was adjudged a bank- rupt in 1878. On the sixth of September, 1880, no application for a discharge having been made to the district court by him, that court made an order that all bankrupts who should not take the necessary steps to have the question of their right to a discharge ready to be determined on, or before the first Monday in December following, ■would be deeined to have unreasonably delayed in endeavoring to obtain a discharge, and it was declared that any crediter or other person interested in the bankrupt's estate mlght, without notice, move for a final order closing the case and denying the discharge for want of timely application therefor. The bankrupt had notice of this order, but the counsel who had attended to his case being sick, he Btates that he wae informed and believed, on that account, no stepo would be taken to prejudice his right to make the application for dis- charge. �On the the fifteenth of December the bankrupt caused an appli- cation in due form to be made for his discharge and presented to the clerk of the district court, who refused to receive it, because of the order of the court of the sixth of September. On the third of January, 1881, the ruatter was brought to the notice of the district court by a petition in due form alleging these f acts, and on the same day a creditor of the bankrupt, who had previously proved his debt against the estate, made an application to the court for a final order closing the case and denying a discharge to the bankrupt, and the court thereupon granted the application of the creditor, and denied the bankrupt his discharge for want of a timely application for, a dis- charge. �It is this order_ of the district court which the bankrupt asks to have reversed, and that the district court should grant his dis- charge, and the only question in the case is whether he should have been permitted to apply for a discharge under the facts stated. There can be no doubt it was entirely competent for the district court to make the order of September 6, 1880. Proceedings were pending in many cases without any application having been made for the dis- charge of the bankrupts respectively, and it was quite proper that some action should be taken by the court in order to finally close all these various proceedings. The only question is whether the court could refuse the application before the case was finally closed by some action which had that effect. The law upon this subject, as it was modified by the amendment of July 26, 1876, is as follows : ��� �
