Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/516

502 FBDEBAL BSPOBTEB. �But apart from this, -when Gri3wold confessed the judgments to Kelly and othera for f 3,571.95i he was doubtloss insolvent, and intended thereby to prevent the United States from eollecting the claim for which it had just obtained a verdict. His whole property, so far as appears, even if unencumbered, was not sufficient to paj*^ this one debt. Nor is it material, in this connection, whether sueh insolvency was known or believed by third persons or not. The fact that the United States had a valid claim against Griswold for $35.228 since January 29, 1874, bas been eonclusi'sfely established by the judgment of the district court. �But, as all claim under these judgments has been formally aban- doned by the creditors therein, except that of L. & B., it is only necessary to consider the effect of this conclusion as to the latter. These judgments being in effect a voluntary assignment by an insolv- ent debtor, the, right of the United States to a priority of payment out of all his property, subject to all valid liens and encumbrances thereon, attached at once. �Under the law of the state a judgment, when doeketed, is a lien upon the debtor 's property, similar to that of a mortgage, and is in effect a convenient method of transferring such property to the judg- ment creditors. Catlin v. Hoffman, 2 Sawy. 491. �The sale, therefore, of lot 8, in block 10, and the west half of lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, in block 73, by L. & B., upon their execution to en- force said judgment and the one to enforce the personal deeree in the suit to foreclose the mortgage of December 18, 1878, on said lot 8, was made subject to the prior right of the United States, and, so far as it interferes with the assertion of such right, must be set aside and the property resold upon the execution of the plaintiff, uniess L. & B. aocount to the plaintiff for the value thereof, whioh the evidence tends to show is about 1 1,600, together with the rents and profits thereof, less the amount of their mortgage for $306.25, with interest. �As to the mortgage of L. & B. on block 18, dated June 4, 1877, these additional facts appear: Griswold was then insolvent, the debt which he owed the United States being greater in amount than the value of all the property elaimed by him or in his name, but the defendants, althougb aware of the fact that the plaintiff had com- menced the action against him to recover this debt, were not other- wise informed on the subject. It appears that on or about June 4, 1877, Griswold presented a note and mortgage upon block 18 for $10,000, payable, with interest at 1 per centum per month, in seven months, at the bank of L. & B. in Salem, and asked for a loan of ��� �