JM FEDERAL REPORTER, ~
or in part of metal ;" that th-e article in question is known in trade
and commerce as bullion fringe, is composed of bullion canetille and
galloons, and assimilates in character, manufacture, and the uses to
which it is applied, to epaulets, galloons, laces, knots, stars, tassels,
and wings of gold, silver, or other metal, enumerated in Schedule N
` of the act of congress of March 3, 1883, and should have been clas-
sied for duty at 25 per cent. and valorem. The court therefore finds
the issue joined for the plaintiffs, and assesses their damages at
$199.40, with interest from the date of payment, and costs of suit.
Hmasnr and others, Assignees, v. Fosmcx
(Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts. April 23, 1884.)
Bmxnurrcr-Iursnnsm on Dwmmms.
Assignees of an estate in bankruptcy are not bound to pay interest upon
dividends which may be declared upon debts which have been fairly and rea-
sonably disputed, from the time that like dividends were declared upon undis-
puted debts.
Semble, they may be ordered to pay such interest as has been earned upon
funds set apart to meet the disputed claim.
At L3·W.
Edward Avery and L. B. Thompson, for appellant.
Myers tt Warner, for Fosdick.
Lownmi, J. The petitioner, Fosdick, has been found by the district
court, and afterwards by a jury here, a creditor of Charles F. Parker &
Co. He now asks that the assignees be ordered to pay interest on the
two dividends of 15 and 5 per cent., respectively, which were declared
long since upon the acknowledged or undisputed debts. The large
amount of the debt due the petitioner, and the time which has been
spent in establishing it, make the interest a matter of some importance.
T The district judge, while sustaining the right to prove the debt, re-
fused the request for interest. .
It is admitted, for the purposes of this hearing, that the bankrupt
iirm were ruined by the fraud of one partner, who borrowed large sums
for his own private purposes, and gave Erm notes therefor. The debt
of the petitioner was of that character; and the question for the court
below, and for the juryhere, was whether the petitioner had notice of
the fraud. It is further admitted that this was a fair subject of doubt,
proper to be referred to a jury. In a single case, such a claim was
allowed: Re Kitzinger, 19 N. B. B. 238, 307. That decision, though
by a veryable judge, and sustained on appeal, is a new departure in
the law of bankruptcy. Of the almostnumberless cases in which a
proof has been contested, no other has been found in which such an
allowance, has been made. By the act of 49 Geo. III. c. 121, § 12,
the-action of assumpsit for recovery of a dividend was abolished, and