
    Dayton and others against Nichols.
    NEW YORK,
    Oct. 1813.
    The provision in the insolvent act* that the charges of proceedings under the act¡ are first to be paid by the assignees, extends only to those service*.? made necessary by the aet5 and which accrue to third persons, who are bound tor perform tho services, as the state printer or commissioner. A person who advances money for the insolvent, at his request, to pay the fees of the printer and commissioner, is not entitled to this peculiar preference $ but must come in for the money lent as a general! eredst- or»
    IN ERE OB, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Nichols brought an action before the justice against Dayton and others, assignees of Elisha Nichols, an insolvent debtor; and stated his demand to be for moneys paid at the request of the insolvent, to enable him to obtain his discharge, and for moneys lent to the insolvent and his assignees, on request. The defendant pleaded non assumpsit, and that no moneys had come to their hands sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff’s demand, and other contingent expenses; and that all the moneys received by the defendants had been applied to such expenses. It was proved that the plaintiff had paid for the insolvent, at his request, nineteen dollars for the charges of printers for advertising, according to the directions of the insolvent act, and for the commissioners fees under the act; that the assignees had sold- property of the defendant on a credit, which had expired before the suit was brought, to the amount of 100 dollars; that they had purchased at the sale to the value of 20 dollars, and had received a further sum of 5 dollars; and that they bad in their hands, proceeds of the property of the defendant, more than sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff’s demand. That a meeting of the assignees, pursuant to the act, was held for the purpose of distributing among the creditors the avails of the insolvent’s estate, and the plaintiff requested the payment of the 19 dollars, pursuant to an order of the commissioner for that purpose; and one of the assignees promised to pay the same to the plaintiff Tbs justice gave judgment for the plaintiff for nineteen dollars.
   Per Curiam.

The demand of the plaintiff below was not fbr "charges of the proceedings under the insolvent act;" but he had advanced money to satisfy those charges. This demand, ac~ cording to his own declaration, was for money lent to the insolvent, and he could, therefore, come in only as a general creditor; and by the act, all costs of suit, and charges of proceedings under the act, and expenses of the assignees, and a reasonable allowance for their trouble, were all to be paid before any dividend among the general creditors, who are then to be paid in proportion to their respective debts. If the plaintiff could come in only as a general creditor, he clearly showed no right of action, for no dividend had been declared, in which his right or demand had been liquidated, and the proportion due to him ascertained. The error in the court below consisted in considering the loan, or advances of the plaintiff to satisfy the fees of the printer and the commissioner, the same as charges of proceedings under the act. These charges mean those which are rendered necessary by the act, and accrue to third persons who are bound to perform the services, such as the state printer and commissioner. A private loan to the insolvent to pay those charges, is a voluntary act of friendship, and is not entitled to that peculiar preference. Whoever advanced money for those purposes did it on the credit of the insolvent, and must stand on the same footing with the other creditors.

Judgment reversed.  