STRIKE'S CASE.

ing, on the trustees9 report, on bringing into court the money or
securities arising on the sale.

Under this decree the trustees reported, that they had, on the
14th of September 1822, made a sale of the two lots, amounting to
three thousand nine hundred and fifty dollars, which sale was finally
ratified on the 10th of February 1823.

31st May, 1823. — WARD, Associate Judge.— Ordered, that this
case be referred to the auditor of this court to be audited.

The solicitors of the plaintiffs, by their petition, stated, that the
plaintiffs had agreed to allow them, as a compensation for their
services, a commission of twenty per cent, on the sum recovered,
deducting therefrom fifty dollars from each which had been paid to
them; that they had so far conducted the cause successfully and
with great care and labor; that the court had ordered notice to be
given to the other creditors of Rogers to exhibit their claims here
for settlement; and as the introduction of such other claims into this
case might lead to some difficulty, they prayed the court to sanction
the allowance of their claims, and to direct the auditor accordingly.

9th January 1824. — ARCHER, Chief Judge. — Ordered, that the
auditor, in stating the account with the trustees, allow to Henry W.
Rogers and Henry M. Murray, solicitors for complainants, the sum
of $690 as complete fees for conduct of the case, subject to the
usual exceptions.

It is stated, in the petition of the plaintiffs' solicitors, that the
court had ordered notice to be given to the creditors of Rogers
to exhibit their claims; but there is no such order to be found
among the papers. Yet it must be presumed, that such an order
was passed and notice given, since it appears, that several of
the creditors of Rogers did actually bring in the vouchers of their
claims. And it appears, that the proceedings and schedule on the
application of Rogers, for the benefit of the insolvent law, had also
been filed, From all which, and the proofs in the case, the auditor,
on the 6th April 1824, made and reported a distribution of the pro-
ceeds of sale among thirteen of the creditors of Rogers, ia which
report the auditor says, that he had not noticed Strike's claims;
because the whole of them appear to have proceeded from, and to
have grown out of the first fraud between Strike and Rogers, and are
not therefore entitled either to a preference or dividend.