Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/289

274 FBDKEAL EEPOBTER, �made sundry objections to testimony in the district court. Thejre was no disposition of them by any order of that court, or by any pro- vision in the decree of that court. The petition of appeal sets forth that the decree below is erroneous because the district court committed errors in its rulings as to the admission of evidence reported by the examiner, and in declining to strike out such as were by defendant objected to, as will more fully appear by the objections to and requests to strike out evidence taken and tiled with and before said judge on the hearing of the cause, some of which are referred to in his decision, and also in the rulings and decision of the said judge; that the defendant is chargeable with all the knowiedge its attorneys in the prosecution of said several suits to judgment possessed, which was acquired in the progress of the suits, or present to their minds, if acquired previously; and also in holding that said attorneys were under.no professional obligation not todiselose the circumstances and designs of the bankrupts, who became clients of theirs after the com- mencement of said suits, who desired to assist defendant, and that the presumption is they did communicate their information; and also in holding the declarations of the attorneys competent evidence . of the intent and knowiedge, and to charge defendant. The district judge rendered a decision, on which he said : "The attorneys employed to bring actions and obtain judgments were the bankrupts' attorneys, and the defendant is chargeable with all the knowiedge they pos- sessed which was acquired by them in the progress of the suits or present to their minds if acquired previously. Story, Ag. § 40 ; The Distilled Spirits, 11 Wall. 356. They were under no professional obligations not to disclose the circumstances and designs of clients who desired to assist the defendant, and the law presumes that they did communicate their information." �The defendant insists that several objections to evidence should be sustained and the evidence excluded. It was essential to prove the intent on the part of the bankrupts. Their declarations, wbile this intent was being effectuated, are as competent as their acts. So, also, the declarations of the attorneys, during the progress of the transaction, are evidence of their intent and knowiedge. The advice given by the attorneys to their clients is excluded, because inadmissible under the rule which forbids the disclosure of con- fidential communications. The objections to and requests to strike ont evidence referred to in the petition of appeal, as taken and filed with and before the district judge on the hearing of the cause, do not appear in the printed record from the district court, unless the ��� �