BRACEY and dawson how far assignee under a commission of bankrupcy shall be  entitle or not to the good of the bankrupt as against other person who claim a  property in they this be a action of trover bring by the plaintiff as assignee  under a commission of bankrupt against the defendant who be a commissioner of  the landtax at the trial before Lord Raymond a case be make for the opinion of  the court in the manner follow on the that of July fairclough a collector of  the landtax become a bankrupt on the that of the same month the commissioner  of the landtax one of which the defendant be issue out their warrant to seize  the good of fairclough for arrear of the landtax which be in his hand the  constable to who the warrant be direct seize the good in question in the hand  of fairclough the same day and detain they in his hand the next day a  commission of bankrupcy issue out against fairclough and his good assign over  to his creditor on the saint on the that of August a sale be make by the  constable in pursuance of the seizure and the plaintiff as one of the assignee  thereupon bring this action sergeant darnel submit it that the action may well  be Barnardiston king b er p maintain the instant that the plaintiff commit the  act of bankrupcy the property of his good be no long in he the property of his  good be in no one till the assignment in the same manner as the property of a  intestate good be in no one till letter of administration grant if this have  be the case of a execution of a private man come against the bankrupt the  assignment afterward will have overreach the execution to this pur  Barnardiston king b pose be the case of Andrews and sir Matthew Decker easter  Geo in the common plea at the sit before the chief justice that be a action of  false return bring against the sheriff for return no one good upon a writ of  execution on evidence the defendant justify his return by reason that the  party against who the writ issue be become a bankrupt and a commission take  out against he at the time of the delivery of the writ to he to be execute yet  no pretence be there that a assignment of the good be make till sometime after  the return notwithstanding this the chief justice of the common plea allow the  return to be good he say there will be no occasion to consider how this will  be in the case of a extent in the present case there be no extent but the good  be seize by a warrant from the commissioner of the landtax under the Act of  parliament sergeant Eyre argue on the other side and cite keb sir William  Jones cro lev and the statute of James the chief justice say that he do agree  a assignment from the commissioner have to many respect a relation to the time  when the act of bankrupcy be commit and therefore if after such act the  bankrupt dispose of his effect the assignment shall certain overreach it he  agree the same too where a sheriff take good in execution of a bankrupt and do  not deliver they over to the party before the assignment make but where the  sheriff do deliver they to the party before the assignment make the assignment  shall not have a relation to defeat that execution because there the execution  be complete he say he can not agree that the bankrupt cease to have the  property of his good at the time of the act of bankrupcy commit the property  do continue in he even till the assignment the property be never in the  commissioner they have only a power give they of assign the effect from the  bankrupt if this have be a extent of the crown in the present case undoubted  the good of the bankrupt will have be bind from the day the extent bear testae  and no assignment can have overreach it for the statute of car do not extend  to extent of the crown he say he think the present case do not differ from  that the landtax be money belong to the crown though appropriate to particular  purpose and the parliament give the king a more speedy remedy than a extent  can be suppose to have put the king in a worse condition than if a extent have  issue as to the opinion that be cite of Lord chief justice eyres he own he can  not agree with it and judge lee say the case in salk be against it however  this matter stand over vide postea