
    Wikle, receiver, vs. Silva et al.
    
    1. The custody of property by the receiver of the court is the custody of the court. One who dispossesses the receiver, therefore, of property consigned to him by the court, dispossesses the court, and of course becomes in contempt of court; and he may be punished for contempt, and the property may be restored.
    2. In this case the question of possession by the receiver was contested ; the affidavits were conflicting; the chancellor refused to grant an order for the restoration of the property in contest, thereby passing on contested facts; and we will not control his discretion, unless it be made clearly to appear that he has abused it.
    
      (a.) Title should not he tried on such a summary proceeding; possession alone is in issue.
    
      3. Iii cases where the chancellor has discharged a rule nisi and ruled that the defendant was not in contempt, this court will still more reluctantly interfere.
    Judgment affirmed.
    April 3, 1883.
   Jackson, Chief Justice.  