
    Root vs. Safford and others.
    It is no objection to a motion for a receiver, and to an order for the examination of the defendant on oath before the master, in a creditor’s suit, that an answer upon the oath«" ” the defendant is waived, by the bill.
    This was a creditor’s suit. E. L. Fancher, for the complainant, applied for an order of reference, to a master, to appoint a receiver, and for the examination of the defendant on oath, before the master, in the usual manner.
    
      A. C. Bradley, for the defendants,
    resisted the application, on the ground that, by the bill of complaint, aa answer upon the oath of the defendant was waived.
   The Chancellor

decided that the waiver of an answer from the defendant on oath constituted no objection to the appointment of a receiver, or to the making of an order for the examination of the defendant on oath before the master, on the reference, with respect to the property to be assigned to the receiver, &c.

Order accordingly.  