
    Nathaniel C. Allen versus James H. Megguire and Trustee.
    A mere creditor, happening to have in his hands specific articles belonging to his debtor, has no lien upon them: he must attach them, as other creditors, for his debt; or he may be charged, as trustee of his debtor, on account of them.
    Israel Smith, the person summoned as trustee of the defendant, disclosed that, at the time of the service of the process upon him, he was possessed of sundry articles of personal property belonging to the defendant, which he was ready to give up, whenever the balance due him on account, which he stated to be 82 dollars 24 cents, should be paid him. He acknowledged that the articles were not left with him as a pledge for security of the said balance ; but said he considered himself entitled to retain them until the balance was paid ; and that he intended so to retain them.
   Curia.

A factor, or other person in whom confidence is reposed, has a right to retain, having a lien for commissions and advances. But a mere creditor, happening to have in his possession specific articles belonging to his debtor, has no lien upon them. He must attach, as other creditors, if he would avail himself of them. If, however, the specific articles which he has in his possession might be come at to be attached, the trustee process is not the proper remedy ; for that will lie only where the goods, &c., cannot be come at, to be attached by the ordinary process of law.

In the case before us, however, the trustee declaring that he claims the goods as his own, in consequence of a supposed lien for the debt, and not disclosing any thing from which it might be inferred that he exposed them to attachment, he may be considered as the trustee, and may expose the goods on execution.

Fessenden for the plaintiff.

Orr for the trustee. 
      
       Vide ante, page 414. — [James vs. Rogers.]
      
     