In re Blankenship

[1] This is a review of an order of the referee in bankruptcy allowing a claim in the above-entitled proceeding. The question sought to be reviewed, and the only one urged by counsel for the trustee, representing the creditors, is very simple. It arises out of the following facts:

The bankrupt in 1906, in consideration of money borrowed by him, gave to his sister a promissory note for $1,200, due one day after date. Under the statute of California (C. C. P. § 337) this note became barred by the statute of limitations four years after maturity. It seems not to have been paid. In 1914, while insolvent, and while the sister of the bankrupt, from her knowledge of the facts, had good reason to believe that the said bankrupt was insolvent, he addressed a communication in writing to his sister, acknowledging the indebtedness, agreeing to pay it, and tendering a payment' of $10 thereon on account. It is found by the referee, and these findings are not challenged, that the claimant, the sister, did not solicit the writing of the said letter, had no knowledge of the intent of the bankrupt in the writing of it, and no knowledge of his then intent to file a voluntary petition in bankruptcy.…