tled shall be paid by the assignees to such solicitor attorney. The settlement of the costs, therefore, is tirely left to the discretion of the Commissioners; and e statute is imperative on the assignees to pay the Il, when the Commissioners have settled them. There not a case to be found, where, after a party has ad an opportunity of procuring a bill to be properly vestigated, and has voluntarily paid it, that he has een permitted to have that bill taxed. Then, as to e petitioner being a creditor. The section just rerred to does not contemplate a creditor who is an signee, but one of the general body of creditors; for e assignees have the right to tax the solicitor's bill, dependently of the provisions of that section. The bject of that section, therefore, was to give parties a ght to have the solicitor's bill taxed, who would not therwise possess it. The settlement of the Commisoners is conclusive, unless there is some suppressio eri, or suggestio falsi, on the part of the solicitor. 'he case of Horlock v. Smith, already cited, was ot so strong as this; for here there has been a setement on legal investigation, while in that case there as payment, without any antecedent investigation. n Waters v. Taylor (a), where there were no errors r improper charges amounting to fraud alleged or roved, on an application to tax a solicitor's bill, hich had been some time previously settled by the lient, the Lord Chancellor dismissed the petition with osts, observing that "a client is not, after payment, o have a taxation merely for asking for it." Has here been, either in Equity or Bankruptcy, any other rinciple recognized, on which a party is permitted to (u) 2 Mylne & C. 526. 1839. Ex parte FOSBROOKE. 1839. Ex parte FOSBROOKE. open an account that has been paid, except on the ground of fraud? Mr. J. Russell, for the two other assignees. The petitioner's co-assignees have amply done their duty in the execution of their trust. Since the fiat was issued, in August 1835, a dividend of 13s. 4d. in the pound has been paid on debts to the amount of 150,000l. [Sir George Rose. Do you support or oppose the petition?] The co-assignees support their own acts, and oppose this petition, which, they contend, the petitioner is not entitled to present, unless he makes out a case of default against his co-assignees. He is here in no other character than that of assignee; for the gist of his right, as a creditor, to apply to tax the solicitor's bill, is, as a creditor who has proved under the fiat; and there is no allegation in the petition that he has proved his debt. Mr. Swanston, in reply, was stopped by the Court. Sir JOHN CROSs.-This is a petition of a party, praying that twelve several bills of costs, which have been already paid to the solicitor by the assignees, may be taxed by the proper officer of the Court. There have been two objections raised to the petition: 1. that the petitioner has no locus standi in curiâ; 2. that he is estopped by his own acts from making any application to tax these bills. In support of the first objection, it has been argued, that the petitioner comes here as assignee, and that one assignee cannot present such a petition, without the concurrence of his co-assignees. But it is expressly alleged in the petition, that he is a creditor of the bankrupt's to the amount of 3001. He therefore has a right to say that he comes here in the character of a creditor, and not in that of an assignee. I think, therefore, that he has clearly a locus standi. Then, as to the estoppel. The objection mainly applies to the 14th section of the act of parliament, which directs the assignees to pay the bills of costs, when they are settled by the Commissioners. Great stress has been laid on there being no case to be found, where a party has been permitted to have a bill taxed, when he has voluntarily paid it, and has had an opportunity of having it properly investigated. But it must be remembered, that the cases on this subject in the books apply to costs in Courts of Law and Equity. In law, if a man pays a bill, he is held to do it of his own accord; and he cannot afterwards dispute the items in it, except on the ground of fraud. But here the statute says, that the costs, when settled by the Commissioners, shall be paid by the assignees. They are therefore obliged to pay the bill. Then the Commissioners, at the audit meeting, declined to tax these bills, saying, "It is very unpleasant to tax solicitors' bills-you, the assignees, may safely pay the bills-you will not have to refund, in case of any overcharge, but the solicitor." In the judgment I am pronouncing in this case, I am far from inferring that the charges in these bills are not fair and proper; but I think, under all the circumstances, that there ought to be an order for the taxation of the bills; and I am sorry to perceive, that the other assignees have thought it necessary to oppose the prayer of this petition. I do not mean to find fault with them for doing what they conceive to be their duty; but it does seem to me rather extraordinary, that they should oppose the present application. So far from the bills being paid 1839. Ex parte FOSBROOK. 1839. Ex parte FOSBROOKE. deliberately, as is said by the counsel for the solicitor, the Sir GEORGE ROSE.-I am of opinion, that the petitioner comes here as a matter of right, in the character of a creditor,—and also, under the circumstances, in that of an assignee,—although he reluctantly deferred to the wishes of his colleagues in the payment of these bills. The solicitor to the fiat, I apprehend, is just as much a trustee for the bankrupt's estate as the assignees who employ him; and is equally liable to a strict investigation of his accounts. The only question will be, therefore, as to the effect of the taxation; but that we have at present no means of judging of. It is said, however, that the assignee is estopped from making this application, by having joined in the payment of the bills, after they had been settled by the Commissioners. But let us see how far he has thus precluded himself. There has been, in fact, no regular taxation; for the Commissioners refused to tax most of the bills; and from those which they professed to tax they merely deducted 17s. 2d. at the suggestion of the agent for the solicitor. Then, as to the payment of the bills. The payment was in consequence of the provisions of an act of parliament, which rendered it imperative on the petitioner to pay them, after an order was made for that purpose by the Commissioners. The payment, therefore, was not the voluntary act of the assignee, but in obedience to the directions of the Commissioners; and it appears, moreover, that when he joined with the two other assignees in signing the draft on the bankers, he expressly stated that he acted and concurred with them in that proceeding, merely in pursuance of what the Commissioners had said. It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, that the bills should be taxed, and the Order is a matter of course. ORDERED as prayed. 1839. Ex parte FOSBROOKE. Ex parte GEORGE FISHER.-In the matter of GEORGE THIS was the petition of a solvent partner to annul It appeared, that the adjudication having been against William Fisher only, this petition, and the affidavits in support of it, were entitled "In the matter of William Fisher." of A. and B." Sir GEORGE ROSE:-The petition and the affidavits "In the matter are wrongly entitled. They ought to have been enti tled "In the matter of George Fisher and William |